Poor Shawn Whannity.. he's been ratcheting up the tough talk about Iran asking "what more do they need to do before we intervene militarily.." this is why people like cheney, whannity etc.. are dangerous.. first sign of trouble? let's invade!!
In fact haven't read the news today; my post was off the cuff and referred to a story I read yesterday about Blair issuing a 48 hour deadline before "something more" would be done.
That said, we sure taught Iran not to take hostages! Giving them EXACTLY what they wanted from this event. I'm sure they won't try THAT again.
I don't have time to search EVERYWHERE, but from a cursory glance, and a couple of "Googles" I can't find the story indicating we had released the 5 Iranians; I saw that a SINGLE Iranian had been let go, but not all. A link would be most helpful.
Iranians are still captives
===============
April 4, 2007
U.S. Weighs Iran Request to Visit Prisoners in Iraq
By EDWARD WONG
BAGHDAD, April 4 — An American military spokesman said today that the Americans were reviewing an informal request from the Iranian government for an envoy to visit five Iranians imprisoned following an American raid in northern Iraq in January.
The spokesman, Maj. Gen. William B. Caldwell IV, said at a news conference that the request was “being assessed at this time.” He added that the Americans had conducted the raid to go after people suspected of carrying out “illegal operations” in Iraq. The general did not say when the Americans might approve or reject the request.
The general also said the International Committee of the Red Cross had recently been allowed to visit a group of prisoners that included one of the five Iranians.
The general’s comments came in response to a reporter’s question about a report on Wednesday from the Iranian state news agency that said an envoy from the Iranian embassy in Iraq will meet with the five detainees.
Ali al-Dabbagh, a spokesman for the Iraqi government, said the five Iranians were a subject of discussion at a regional conference held last month in Baghdad that was attended by American and Iranian diplomats.
Talk of the five detainees came on the same day that the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said his country would free 15 British marines and sailors who had been held for nearly two weeks. The British detainees were seized by the Iranian military in the northern Persian Gulf on March 23 and accused of having trespassed into Iran’s territorial waters.
General Caldwell did not say whether there was any connection between talks over the five Iranians and negotiations over the 15 British prisoners.
The five Iranians imprisoned by the Americans were among six people detained in a raid on Jan. 11 in Erbil, the capital of the autonomous Kurdistan region. American attack helicopters and armored vehicles backed up the soldiers doing the raid, and 200 Kurdish soldiers surrounded the Americans in a tense standoff before letting the Americans leave with their prisoners. One of the detainees was released that day.
The Bush administration has long accused Iran of giving weapons and money to Shiite militias in Iraq, but has escalated its accusations against Iran in recent months. Military officials say they have evidence that Iran has given technology for deadly bombs called explosively formed penetrators to Shiite militias here. The number of American soldiers being killed by such bombs has risen sharply, the officials say.
The White House has also been pushing the United Nations to impose harsh sanctions on Iran to try and get the country to curb its nuclear program. American officials say Iran is trying to develop a nuclear weapon.
On Tuesday, an Iranian diplomat who was kidnapped more than eight weeks ago by men wearing uniforms from the Iraqi security forces was released to the Iranian embassy. The Iraqi foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, said he had pushed hard to get captors to free the diplomat, Jalal Sharafi, and he was still working on the issue of the five Iranians held by the Americans.
Mr. Zebari said the liberation of Mr. Sharafi, the second secretary of the Iranian embassy here, had nothing to do with the standoff over the 15 British marines and sailors.
In other political wrangling, two members of Parliament who answer to Moktada al-Sadr, the radical Shiite cleric, were fired by Mr. Sadr for meeting with the Americans, a third legislator, Saleh al-Ajili, said on Wednesday. American military officials say Mr. Sadr is in Iran, while Mr. Sadr’s supporters say he is still in Iraq.
Mr. Ajili declined to give details of the meetings that the two fired legislators, Salam al-Maliki and Qusay Abdul Wahab, had with the Americans. Mr. Maliki is a former transportation minister. “We have an order not to meet with anyone from the occupation authorities,” Mr. Ajili said.
The Sadr organization holds at least 30 of the 275 seats in Parliament. Mr. Ajili did not say who would replace the two fired legislators.
Five employees of a power station were shot dead on Wednesday in an ambush west of the oil-city of Kirkuk, police officials said. In the Kut area, a concealed bomb killed two Iraqi soldiers. A former Iraqi Army colonel was shot dead in a restaurant in Falluja.
Four Iraqi policemen were killed in an ambush in restive Diyala province on Tuesday night, a police official said on Wednesday. A civilian was killed and seven wounded in an attack the same day in the town of Khalis. Four bodies, including one of a policeman, were found Wednesday in Baquba, the capital of Diyala.
At least 22 shepherds and their sheep were abducted on Wednesday west of the holy Shiite city of Karbala by men in police uniforms. Police officials in Karbala denied any involvement.
Qais Mizher contributed reporting for this article from Baghdad and NYT employees contributed reporting from other cities in Iraq.
Yeah, that's all I had read. The US denies any linkage, of course.
We didn't give them what they wanted...
Trini just tried to punk the UK (and us by proxy) and realized as I said...Jimmy Carter isn't in office anymore.
The troop buildup alongside the Iranian border...the total lack of support from China, Russia and even the biggest commies in the EU...
He's just trying to save face and appear as if he stood up to big bad USA and UK...
He's still going to be up creek once the sanctions kick in....something his stunt guranteed, creek with his own people...
Sanctions that would be pretty much unenforcable without our military surroundhing his ass on all sides.
And what a surprise...50% of UK citizens favored military action against Iran if necessary to gaint he release of their soldiers.
Don't listen to these idiots...they actually think this guy Trini is a reasonable man...that's tells you the degree of idiot they are.
Gervin's Afro being idiot #1 of course.
So let me get this straight. Did Iran do this to save face? Or to stand up to the US/UK? In the end no military action was needed and your upset?
You talk of sanctions? I thought you were against sanctions.They actually worked in Iraq before Bush decided to play war..Not a peep from you.. so do you support sanctions or not?
Whott as far as me being an idiot your side has been wrong on everything since day one so if I'm an idiot what does that make you?
According to Drudge, this was an Easter present, and in celebration of Mohammed's birthday.
They're basically just really nice people.
It was one long ass press conference. Lots of stuff like that was said.
My bad; I'd read online that the Iranians had been released. I guess not.
Less Irish beer for you.
I think he did it to rally support in his own country...typical ty politician trick to try to ride some good old anti-americanism to a respite from criticism on the home front...
Jaques Chirac did it last time he got elected...was the only thing that got him elected.
To try and use them as a bagaining chip to avoid sanctions - didn't work.
To see how Britain and America would respond - found that out - Britain was about 2 seconds away from going to war on this...with popular support of the people.
Look...put yourself in his shoes...you are a President of a country...and the military of your greatest enemy surrounds you on all sides...you are a ing terrorist thug whose only known skill is in hostage taking...
What would you do?
Then he saw that we weren't ing around...
I notice no one posted the articles about the US Troop buildup along the Iranian border...
Kinda...we still have problems.In the end no military action was needed and your upset?
I know you are one of the idiots that thinks this guy just wants to live in Peace...but you are ing wrong, that's not what he wants.
You talk of sanctions? I thought you were against sanctions.They actually worked in Iraq before Bush decided to play war..Not a peep from you.. so do you support sanctions or not?
Those sanctions didn't do much in Iraq idiot...are you, or are you not aware of Saddam building palaces with gold toilet seats while his people starved?
And it's not like the UN sanctions worked anyway..due to the UN corruption.
I am in favor of these because the US military is in position to totally enforce them...they'll make Trini lose popularity...
But no, fool, they are not the ultimate solutuon, they'll stop working eventually...like, after 15 years or so. Mostly sanctions only hurt the people...
Iranians are particularly pissed right now at the prospect of sanctions...will definitely work short term...
But after 15 years or so of Americans LIKE YOURSELF not caring about the people suffering under the sanctions while the leaders live like kings, they'll hate us just as much
Those Iraqi sanctions are a big reason why we weren't as popular in Iraq this time around as we were during the Persian Gulf War...that, and of course, letting them get slaughtered by Saddam after their uprising last time(call this the Powell Doctrine, or the UN's idea of war).
Whott as far as me being an idiot your side has been wrong on everything since day one so if I'm an idiot what does that make you?
I am not wrong on anything, you like all the libs on this board, don't know about the history of these conflicts...all you know is, Bush bad - everyone else good.
You don't understand the mindset of the religious fascists we are squared off against, you seem to think they're just a bunch of misunderstood hippies or something...you're wrong.
That's all the left can do now...is oppose Bush, even if it means they support some seriously ed up people in the process...
That's all you cazn do, that's all your political brain can do, that's all NbaDan can do, that's all boutons can do...hate Bush.
That is your politics, that is the politics of hte lefties on this board. Bush = Bad
That's it.
You'd guys would shoot a baby in the head if it would get rid of Bush...admit it. That is your only political view.
You don't know about international politics either...because you guys ing think Angels fly out of the ass of Europe or something...
Last edited by whottt; 04-04-2007 at 10:22 PM.
Why don't you do that? I simply didn't see any.I notice no one posted the articles about the US Troop buildup along the Iranian border...
You sh look harder....
In fact...you should pay a lot more attention to minute details like that....
You sh also seriously consider looking into the Presidents powers as the Commander in Chief...seriously...I am wondering if you were drunk or sick or something when you made the comments about what Bush is limited too...he's not just limited to cruise missles...not even close....add in the fact that there is a lot of grey areas as to just what powers the President does have...and it's his Supreme Court....and well, that was just a very unChumplike comment, usually when you don't know what you are talking about your are vague....I reccomend you go back to that approach if this was some kind of new strategy.
Quit stalling and just link it. I read about some naval exercises but we do that all the time.
And provide a link that proves Bush can launch a full scale invasion of Iran with no congressional approval or appropriations while you're at it.
Sanctions never work, ask Castro.
This iran scene, looks like israel/lebanon war last year conflict....
israel is surrounded, but has the backup of USA and UK, but we all know the idiots who are the smaller player always start/stir , and when things dont go there way, they come running to NATO/EU for help...thats how it is....had the surrounding arab countries retaliated, good bye israel.
same with iran, with all coalition forces gaurding the border, but the other concern is the neighboring arab countries like lebanon, syria, palestine.....
did sanctions work? to a degree it did, untill they start to increase there n demands....
The only excuse I see Bush being able use to strike Iran is the 9/14 joint resolution of congress -- but that begs the question why he needed further authorization to invade Iraq the following year?
And there's also the small problem of Bush's not currently having any continued funding for the two wars he has already started but hasn't finished. Where exactly is the funding for the third, and by far the largest war coming from? To say nothing of the troops -- where are all the troops for the full-scale invasion of Iran coming from?
Chuckle. What are you, Lazy?
That's okay...you'll hear about it again.
Yawn...provide the link that says all he can do is launch a few cruise missles...And provide a link that proves Bush can launch a full scale invasion of Iran with no congressional approval or appropriations while you're at it.
You need to read it more than I do...
Trust me on this one....Chump......hmmm now that I think about it, I like the go out on a limb/unvague Chump, better....so don't do it.
What's the hold up?
Why are you stalling so much?
Just give me those links.You want a link to the authorization to use force in Iraq that you say he didn't need?Yawn...provide the link that says all he can do is launch a few cruise missles...
You want every appropriation bill for Iraq and Afghanistan made since 2002?
You need to take junior high school civics again.
Here's a link that might be more your speed;
http://youtube.com/watch?v=mEJL2Uuv-oQ
Last edited by ChumpDumper; 04-05-2007 at 02:07 AM.
Damn...that's bad, do you have mental block on this one issue or something?
And there's also the small problem of Bush's not currently having any continued funding for the two wars he has already started but hasn't finished.
So if we go to War with Iran you think Congress won't fund it? That will be a first.
He has the power to incite a war with Iran, he has the power to kick the out of IRan's infrastructure and cut off all outside logistical support, and take out IRan's nuclear facilitiesWhere exactly is the funding for the third, and by far the largest war coming from?
To say nothing of the troops -- where are all the troops for the full-scale invasion of Iran coming from?
You're drunk aren't you?
Damn you must be drunk or something.
Come back when you are sober...I enjoy slapping you, but I don't get much out of it when you are doing it to yourself.
I want you to tell me something...what can Iran do?
If our military is sitting in Iraq and Afghanistan, two soverign nations on non hostile terms with Iran...which incidentally border Iran...and we launch attacks from the Persian Gulf...
What can Iran do?
You tell me Chump...
Go into Afghanistan and Iraq?
LMAO. Die in the Persian Gulf?
What they can do is sit there and hole up while all outside aid and resources are cut off...
LMAO, those ers can't even produce enough fuel on their own to survive that kind of isolation.
As I have been saying...oh since the day we went into Iraq with regards to Iran...
How can anyone think Iran is better off now than they were prior to us going into Iraq.
How can anyone think that.
They are in a worse position than Iraq was, they also don't have nearly as experienced of a hardened military as we do, or as Iraq did.
And there elements within the country that seek to overthrow it's govt...large elements...they just need some help.
When Trini gets them bombed because of a being a pompous ass, they'll go cut off his head themselves...
What's going to replace them? A hostile ISlamic Theocracy sworn to our destruction? Oh .
But anyway...all of this is moot, all he's got to do is take out their nuclear facilities...problem solved. That's the minimalist scenario....
He just needs an excuse. A good one.
Personally I am pissed at the current admin for cowtowing to our anti-wars...
We sent Bush in for the max term and voted in his congress...
That was America saying...go ing do it...do it now. You are home free.
That's what America said four years ago...and it seems as if he's let the anti-wars get to him...that's his bad and to his detriment, he let liberals hear them roar get to him...well done commies.
...is my name google?
And who's ing stalling...I was making a long quality post.
Link is not forthcoming...no stall to it. I don't want to link it...I want you to link it.
Just give me those links.You want a link to the authorization to use force in Iraq that you say he didn't need?
No...I want a list of every war declaration by Congress since oh say...1900 or so.You want every appropriation bill for Iraq and Afghanistan made since 2002?
And a link that says all he can do is launch cruise missles...
You need to take junior high school civics again.
Here's a link that might be more your speed;
http://youtube.com/watch?v=mEJL2Uuv-oQ
Damn...
And a link to why you think cruise missles can't start a war...
It's like...not only are you striking out...
Well there's a good metaphor in there, but it will take some time to come up with something to describe just how bad your arguments are right now...
Seriously Chump. What's wrong with you?
This is definitely not the Chump I am used to arguing with...is this some kind of ploy to get backhanded praise or something?
Since you can't even argue anything different, I win that argument by default. Thanks for your unspoken stipulation of this point you won't even try to counter.Damn...that's bad, do you have mental block on this one issue or something?It's almost happening with Iraq now. You need to pay attention.So if we go to War with Iran you think Congress won't fund it? That will be a first.So you are agreeing that he's just going to lob some cruise missiles and drop a couple of bombs in there? Damn, you need to make up your mind for once.He has the power to incite a war with Iran, he has the power to kick the out of IRan's infrastructure and cut off all outside logistical support, and take out IRan's nuclear facilitiesWhy can't you just answer these questions when they are put to you?You're drunk aren't you?
Damn you must be drunk or something.
All you can do is stall. That's competely weak.Yeah, we've all heard your grand theory of mideast conquest. The great thing about making up is you can cite yourself as a source.As I have been saying...oh since the day we went into Iraq with regards to Iran...What is America saying now after it voted Bush's party out of office because of the fiasco in Iraq? Why are you in denial about that?That was America saying...go ing do it...do it now. That's what America said four years ago.
A new poll shows that declining American public support for the war in Iraq is leading to an increasingly negative public opinion of resorting to military force to settle global conflicts. The findings come in the fourth survey conducted jointly by the non-profit organization Public Agenda and Foreign Affairs, one of America's most influential publications on foreign policy....
"For example, 84 percent are worried about the way things are going for the United States in world affairs. Eighty-two percent say the world is becoming more dangerous for the United States, 73 percent say the United States is not doing a good job as a leader in creating a more peaceful, prosperous world, and 68 percent believe the rest of the world sees the United States negatively. Actually, one third, 34 percent, say very negatively. And 67 percent, two out of three, say that U.S. relations with the rest of world are on the wrong track," he said.
She called the current anxiety indicator "very high" at 137 points, out of a total possible 200 points.
An overwhelming number of the people polled linked the U.S. image around the world to global security. They urged the United States to improve its reputation by taking a more positive leadership role in issues like reducing global warming and controlling diseases.
Wooden says the survey specifically shows that Americans are strongly opposed to using military force around the world.
As an example of this, she said only eight percent of the respondents supported possible military action against Iran. At the same time, 70 percent of the respondents favor a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq within 12 months.
http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-04-03-voa62.cfm
That's from VoA yesterday, not September 12, 2001.
I'm sorry Bush squandered all the goodwill that the US was given after the 9/11 attacks. I'm sorry he never finished the job of killing the real terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan. I'm sorry he neatly fulfilled Osama's propoganda by invading and occupying Iraq in the first place, and I'm really sorry he didn't take it seriously enough to send enough troops to do it right and I'm sorry he sent a bunch of inexperienced political hacks to rebuild the country in three month shifts. The problem is he's not sorry and can't even admit to the most obvious of his ups. Neither can you.
Bush continually ed up on a monumental scale after 9/11 and lost his popular support, yet you think he still enjoys a mandate from the people. You are in severe denial just because there is a slowdown in the killing of muslims. It's quite sad to see. You used to come close to making sense in your arguments.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
