|
Obama, for the win. (pg. 96)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Alex |
| The ideal choice would be Jack Bauer... Too bad he's so busy, fictional...and overqualified. |
|
|
| RJT |
I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/...i_n_108510.html
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/22/kristol-bush-iran/
| quote: |
On Fox News Sunday this morning, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol said that President Bush is more likely to attack Iran if he believes Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) is going to be elected.
However, “if the president thought John McCain was going to be the next president, he would think it more appropriate to let the next president make that decision than do it on his way out,” Kristol said, reinforcing the fact that McCain is offering a third Bush term on Iran.
“I do wonder with Senator Obama, if President Bush thinks Senator Obama’s going to win, does he somehow think — does he worry that Obama won’t follow through on that policy,” Kristol added. Host Chris Wallace then asked if Kristol was suggesting that Bush might “launch a military strike” before or after the election:| quote: |
WALLACE: So, you’re suggesting that he might in fact, if Obama’s going to win the election, either before or after the election, launch a military strike?
KRISTOL: I don’t know. I mean, I think he would worry about it. On the other hand, you can’t — it’s hard to make foreign policy based on guesses of election results. I think Israel is worried though. I mean, what is, what signal goes to Ahmadinejad if Obama wins on a platform of unconditional negotiations and with an obvious reluctance to even talk about using military force. |
Kristol also suggested that Obama’s election would tempt Saudi Arabia and Egypt to think, “maybe we can use nuclear weapons.” Watch it:
Kristol’s belief that Bush might attack Iran before leaving office is not new. In April, he told Bill Bennett that it wasn’t “out of the question” that Bush would consider such a strike because “people are overdoing how much of a lame duck the president is.”
The claim that Obama’s potential election could force Bush’s hand also isn’t new. Earlier this month, far-right pseudo scholar Daniel Pipes told National Review Online that “President Bush will do something” if the Democratic nominee won. “Should it be Mr. McCain that wins, he’ll punt,” said Pipes.
Both Kristol and Pipes apparently agree with President Bush’s claim in March that McCain’s “not going to change” his foreign policy, |
If it were true, our commander in chief and his staff are basically not just evil, manipulative, douchebags, all of whom are massive ing idiots. Obviously I don't think that's the case (I think Kristol is a moron and this is a bunch of bull) - maybe Bush, but not every single person around him is that ing dense.
So given that it isn't true, then that just means the media in the U.S. are every bit as sensationalist and worthless as people have been saying for years.
I'm afraid all of that is true, and more of the first bit than I had ever thought as well.
It's going to be deep breaths until January, methinks. :( |
|
|
| Az |
I thought I heard he didn't have the power to do that without senate support? what with being a "lame duck" president and all?
(my understanding of american political system is poor at best) |
|
|
| Scottaculous |
| Kristol is a tool and a fearmonger. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by Az
I thought I heard he didn't have the power to do that without senate support? |
That's how the system is supposed to work. But it hasn't worked that way in practice for a while.
In practice, presidents after Vietnam have generally done whatever they wanted and then asked for legislative support later. |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
So given that it isn't true, then that just means the media in the U.S. are every bit as sensationalist and worthless as people have been saying for years. |
Right now, I can't think of a single country where most journalists actually know what they're talking about and/or have admirable working ethics... and, I hope this doesn't sound arrogant, but I am used to reading the news in quite a few languages, so I'm not just talking about 2 or 3 countries =/ |
|
|
| idoru |
| FOX News, Rob. FOX News. That's all that's needed to be said, really. |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by idoru
FOX News, Rob. FOX News. That's all that's needed to be said, really. |
Actually, as much as I usually regard anything aired on that channel with a healthy degree of skepticism, this time it scares me. Kristol is the editor of The Weekly Standard (most influential conservative policy journal) and op-ed columnist for The New York Times - in other words, he's not so much a journalist as an insider with a lot of clout.
Furthermore, he's not the only one making these kinds of statements this week:
| quote: | | John Bolton, echoing the drift of Bill Kristol, predicts a strike on Iran before the next president takes office. I wish I could dismiss this as grandstanding. I fear it isn't. |
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.c...ybe-a-nove.html
| quote: | I think if they [Israel] are to do anything, the most likely period is after our elections and before the inauguration of the next President. I don’t think they will do anything before our election because they don’t want to affect it. And they’d have to make a judgment whether to go during the remainder of President Bush’s term in office or wait for his successor.
Bolton gamed out the fallout from an attack on Iran. He claimed that Iran’s options to retaliate after being attacked are actually “less broad than people think.” He suggested that Iran would not want to escalate a conflict because 1) it still needs to export oil, 2) it would worry about “an even greater response” from Israel, 3) and it would worry about the U.S.’s response.
Bolton then concluded that Arab states would be excited if the U.S. or Israel attacked Iran:
I don’t think you’d hear the Arab states say this publicly, but they would be delighted if the United States or Israel destroyed the Iranian nuclear weapons capability. |
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/22...rabs-delighted/ |
|
|
| RJT |
Aaaaaaand this thread hasn't been bumped in a while because now that we have our two candidates, the media has no reason to cover the election.
:(
God do I hate the American political system and the way the media basically controls it. |
|
|
| trunks1022 |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
Aaaaaaand this thread hasn't been bumped in a while because now that we have our two candidates, the media has no reason to cover the election.
:(
God do I hate the American political system and the way the media basically controls it. |
you're reading the wrong sources then :p
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/07/t...ml?ref=business |
|
|
| RJT |
Puff pieces don't count ;) |
|
|
| Ang ' ela_ie |
 |
|
|
|
|
