GOP continues drive for preemptive "war of choice" with Iran

a reply to: RancorXXX

The failing lies with the GOP and its so called leaders, who are on the move again in pushing for a Middle East war, and their end game has always been IRAN! Look at the "Policy for a New American Century" (PNAC) for their game plan. Netanyahoo is a full-fledged NEOCON and they are conspiring together to destroy diplomacy between the US and Iran and FORCE us into another war.

Thank you for bringing up "PNAC" (it's "Project for a New American Century" BTW)

The end game of the PNAC is to topple the governments of seven ME countries that are resistant to our corporate (and theological) interests, and Iran is the ultimate end-game goal of that list,

PNAC: Their Goal: The neoconservative agenda:

Established in the spring of 1997 and funded largely by the energy and arms industries, the Project for the New American Century was founded as the neoconservative think tank whose stated goal was to usher in a “new American century”. Having won the cold war and no military threat to speak of, this group of ideologues created a blueprint for the future whose agenda was to capitalize upon our surplus of military forces and funds and forcing American hegemony and corporate privatization throughout the world. In their statement of principles they outline a fourfold agenda:

1) Increase an already enormous military budget at the expense of domestic social programs
2) Toppling of regimes resistant to our corporate interests
3) Forcing democracy at the barrel of a gun in regions that have no history of the democratic process
4) Replacing the UN’s role of preserving and extending international order

Just Google "Project for a New American Century" or look it up here on ATS, obviously it's a huge topic and far too much to go into here, but it absolutely ties in with the games currently being played by the GOP in Congress.

Just because they have a Democrat witting in the WH doesn't mean they shelved their plans. That can thwart and byapss and obstruct a president to the point they still get their goal, if it may take a little longer so what, and if it means harming their own nation in the process, so what? They are insulated from the affects of their own actions, and will profit handsomely when it succeeds.

a reply to: grandmakdw

Isn't blaming Bush getting a little tiresome? It is such an old worn out excuse for not taking responsibility for ones own behavior. Even Hillary pulled that lame, tired, more than 1/2 a decades old refrain for the Democrats.

Isn't pretending that Bush shouldn't be blame for stating this war on terror based on lies getting tiresome?

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

Yes, but you won't hear a peep about that in the media!

Israel want's nothing more than to prod the USA into war with Iran.

I'm sorry, but whoever's idea that of taking a bunch of Caucasian Jews and transplanting them in the Middle East would work out ...

It was a recipe for disaster. "Hey lets take a bunch of white people and force their settlement into a highly religiously sensitive area, displacing Arab people! Nah, it'll work out just fine -- after all this is their ancestral homeland, even though they look nothing like the ethnic people in the area!". . .

Whoa! I didn't expect racism at its ugliest from a Mod.

Blows me away!

And you ignore the fact that NBC, MSNBC
are telling the US people the exact things you claim the media is not telling Americans.
NBC and MSNBC firmly tow the Democratic Party line in reporting 1/2 truths as fact.
Do you not realize that Obama hired spouses and siblings of NBC,ABC,CBS CEO's
to be on his staff and in very high positions in his administration
to insure that the networks would only tell one side of the story.

Republican Senators Write To Leaders Of Iran, Attempt To Sabotage Nuclear Deal

Forty-seven Republican senators are seeking to undermine the international negotiations aimed at containing Iran’s nuclear program with an open letter to the government of Iran, warning the Persian leaders that any deal they strike with the United States and its international partners will not last past the Obama administration.

Arguing that the Senate must ratify a treaty by “a two-thirds vote,” the senators argue that they “will consider any agreement regarding your nuclear-weapons program that is not approved by the Congress as nothing more than an executive agreement between President Obama and Ayatollah Khamenei.” “The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen,” they warn.

They won't even wait to see if the Senate would ratify such a vote, instead they are going directly to a foreign leader and saying "don't even bother."

These Senators are the one's interfering with Congress, and they are directly interfering with diplomatic negotiations between the two nations. Again, this has never happened in US history, where some members of Congress sabotaged negotiations.

This is treason.

originally posted by: grandmakdw

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
a reply to: grandmakdw

No doubt a number of chickenhawks will fully agree with you - war by any means. U-S-A!

Yup gotta kill though godless Araabbbbs YEHAAAAA! derp derp!

Just like Blackmar. your brain was flooded with hormones that prevented you from reading the last paragraph correctly.

Please read my reply to Blackmar.

It is Obama who has already started a war in the ME, wake up,

Seriously? You telling someone to wake up? Obama may be guilty of not ending a ME war soon enough but he certainly didn't start it as a US Senator.

originally posted by: damwel

originally posted by: grandmakdw

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
a reply to: grandmakdw

No doubt a number of chickenhawks will fully agree with you - war by any means. U-S-A!

Yup gotta kill though godless Araabbbbs YEHAAAAA! derp derp!

Just like Blackmar. your brain was flooded with hormones that prevented you from reading the last paragraph correctly.

Please read my reply to Blackmar.

It is Obama who has already started a war in the ME, wake up,

Seriously? You telling someone to wake up? Obama may be guilty of not ending a ME war soon enough but he certainly didn't start it as a US Senator.

You are correct, I should have said Obama RESTARTED a war in the ME

after promising all Americans that all troops would be withdrawn and the US would leave the ME.

Saw this post on Reddit:

Not the first time republicans have pulled this ****. Last time it cost us thousands of American life's. Lyndon Johnson was on the verge of signing a peace treaty with the veitcong, the deal was about to be sealed when Nixon stuck his nose into it. Nixon told the Vietcong to not take the offer because he would give them a better deal when he was elected. Nixon knew if Johnson was able to end the war and bring the troops home Nixon would not win the election. The rest is history. [snip]

Edit; article- www.ibtimes.com...

Another: www.bbc.com... with tape excerpts

www.reddit.com...

To BlackM; this would indicate it's not the first time it has happened (someone in Congress sabotaging WH diplomacy), although it does indicate the same branch in politics has a history of such treasonous actions.

a reply to: grandmakdw

and why does this description of obama sound so familiar??
oh ya it kind of describes the bush presidency also!!

you want war??
okay first you find the funds for that war without killing the american citizens through starvation and homelessness!
and well make sure that it's you or your kids that are the first to get sent to the battleground!!

what I am getting from the republican statements is that hey if I want war vote republican!!
otherwise vote dem!!!

unfortunately I don't think it matters which party get office we are still screwed but well guess I'll make a mental note to make sure I don't vote republican-- the party that would rather starve their people at home for the priviledge of killing people overseas-- all in the name of God of course!

The Logan Act:

The Logan Act (1 Stat. 613, 30 January 1799, currently codified at 18 U.S.C. § 953) is a United States federal law that forbids unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments. It was passed in 1799 and last amended in 1994.

§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.

"Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both."

Logan Act

Thanks for the link Ranc. saw this there as well.

This now sets a damning precedent, let it be known to all world leaders that negotiating with the United States president and US State Department are futile efforts as NEOCONS have only one objective goal, WAR!

a reply to: Blackmarketeer

You had real belief that *OBAMA* was capable of successful negotiations with "terrorist leadership" in Iran?

How much Koolaid does it take to warp your mind into such delusion?

a reply to: Flatfish

If the GOP has proven anything over the past 6yrs, it's the fact that they couldn't negotiate their way out of a pissed on paper bag, even amongst themselves.

Right. and big LOL!

They parade themselves around full of their own self-aggrandizement and rhetoric, when actually, the only thing they are full of, is themselves. I'm not trying to be hateful, but unfortunately it seems to be the reality. Oh how I wish it weren't so!

I agree though, this particular group of rebels seems rather paralyzed when it comes to being able to think things through to possible conclusions and consequences of said conclusions they don't seem to fathom. It is, indeed, rather frightening that they have gained the positions they have. Big mistake.

originally posted by: JIMC5499
I read where somebody asked Obama if he ever read the Constitution. I think that some of the people here need to read it as well.
ARTICLE II, SECTION 2, CLAUSE 2
The President... shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur....


Those Senators are just doing their job.

No they are not doing their job. Foreign is the job of the state dept and the President not the Senate.

a reply to: grandmakdw

after promising all Americans that all troops would be withdrawn and the US would leave the ME.

History is clearly not your best subject. He never once said we would leave the ME (Middle East). Unless you want to conflate Iraq and Afghanistan with the entire Middle East.

There's no peace with Iran. Iran's goal is the (ideal) conversion of everybody to Shia Islam, the destruction of Israel, a new Persia and inevitably the return of Mahdi. There's no future except one with Mahdi. All infidels will be killed. Atheist? Christian? Jew? Buddhist? All killed. You must be converted.

a reply to: grandmakdw

Do you not realize that Obama hired spouses and siblings of NBC,ABC,CBS CEO's
to be on his staff and in very high positions in his administration
to insure that the networks would only tell one side of the story.

I'd like to read more about that. Can you provide some links to where you learned this?

Here is one of the reason why this is unfolding;

Why Boehner’s invite to Netanyahu is unconstitutional

House Speaker John Boehner’s annoyance with President Barack Obama is turning into a grudge match against the Constitution.

Boehner’s decision to invite a foreign head of government to address Congress without first consulting the sitting president has no precedent in American history. And for a simple reason. It’s unconstitutional.

Boehner (R-Ohio) fully admits that his failure to communicate with the White House was not an oversight. Like a schoolboy passing notes when the teacher turns to the blackboard, he sneaked behind Obama’s back to set the date for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech with his country’s ambassador to the United States. Boehner asked the foreign dignitary not to tell the U.S. president.

These same scumbag senators are shredding and pissing on the constitution. Now they went too far and sabotaged US foreign policy.

a reply to: grandmakdw

Whoa! I didn't expect racism at its ugliest from a Mod.

Pointing out that they are Caucasian Jews is not racism it's fact. They are of European, Russian and American decent. A vast majority of these people's ancestors never stepped foot in the ME much less being descended from people that came from that area.

originally posted by: jonnywhite
Personally, I don't think we'll war with Iran. But we will war with someone over there and it'll indirectly link to Iran.

That would be the war with Syria because they are allied with Iran. When the American people stood up and proclaimed that we didn't want another war they had to come up with another reason to supply arms to rebels in the civil war we helped to start in Syria. Now we have ISIS yet another reason for our presence in the ME. Every time we get rid of one group that was the reason for America to be in the ME another group suddenly pops up.

originally posted by: jonnywhite
There's no peace with Iran. Iran's goal is the conversion of everybody to Shia and destruction of Israel and a new Persia and inevitably the return of Mahdi.

Have you overlooked the fact that Israel has done nothing but try to get America to attack Iran for decades not to mention Israel is constantly saying they are going to attack Iran? Iran has always said if Israel attacked them they would defend themselves. How is Iran waiting for the return of the Mahdi a bad thing? He is supposed to bring justice to the world and a funny thing people always leave out when they mention the Mahdi is that he is supposed to return with Jesus. They are supposed to bring about the end of the antichrist and start a time of peace and prosperity for all mankind.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: grandmakdw

and why does this description of obama sound so familiar??
oh ya it kind of describes the bush presidency also!!

you want war??
okay first you find the funds for that war without killing the american citizens through starvation and homelessness!
and well make sure that it's you or your kids that are the first to get sent to the battleground!!

what I am getting from the republican statements is that hey if I want war vote republican!!
otherwise vote dem!!!

unfortunately I don't think it matters which party get office we are still screwed but well guess I'll make a mental note to make sure I don't vote republican-- the party that would rather starve their people at home for the priviledge of killing people overseas-- all in the name of God of course!

I don't want war. You are projecting a bigoted and prejudiced idea of what you think I should think.

Wake up, there can be a good case made for BOTH sides of the political spectrum wanting war. Only one side is actually currently engaged in it, without the consent of the congress, or if you feel I must say it, without the consent of Republicans. It is a Democrat, Obama who unilaterally RESTARTED a war that was dying down and ending, in the middle east by sending troops there to fight a religious war against Jihadists. Why are you all blind to that? Is towing the party line more important than peace? It appears so when you ignore the fact that Obama not only did not remove all the troops from the ME, he resent them back to the middle east.

If you want to play the party blame game.
Remember it was Michelle Obama who is directly responsible for
reducing the number of calories that children are fed at school,
and many many poor children rely on that meal as their only meal for the day.
She reduced it to 600 calories for young children and 800 calories for older children.
That is starvation and deliberate starvation of the poorest and most vulnerable children.
Stop trying to play a kool-aid party line blame game with me.