Iran Is Now A Top Threat To America

[Truth Teller]

Low-functioning brain working overtime.....struggling....breathing hard .... fading ....over and out....

D00d, you seriously cannot be this fucking stupid.

Why do you think he cannot be that fucking stupid? What's your evidence? I say he can be and is!

He considers himself a democrat and to him, democrats are never wrong, compassionate, smart, kind, generous and love all human beings of all races, creeds and colors.

I find him to be the opposite of what he believes.

MISTAKING THE MESSENGER FOR THE MESSAGE ALERTS!

He forgot that the purported purpose of attacking Iran is because Iran is now "a top threat to America," presumably because Iran is developing nuclear weapons.

Somehow the purpose evolved into "self-defense" on the pretext that Iran has condemned an American spy to death.

Teller's forgetting of the pretext pretty well sums up the cynical logic at work in the war-mongering mind: If one pretext doesn't work (i.e., convince people), just make up another one, and if that doesn't work, well fuck it, just attack and see what happens.

You are taking things out of context again Guido.

To my mind

Does it exist?

there is no lower life form than a war-mongering "liberal."

A real progressive would not support a nation with the major human-rights abuses Iran has getting nukes.

And that's only for starters.

Totally agree. For TT, as long as Obama does it, or anyone with a D next to their name, its OK.

Source?

He gets all of his information from CNN

Hardly.

and he'll be damned to get information from any other source.

The propaganda you buy into is not factual.

"Propaganda, all is phony"-Bob Dylan.

TT and his ilk are part of the problem because no matter what, on erection day this November, he will pull that lever for Obama.

I will do so because I agree with Obama and the Dems on domestic policy and I disagree with Romeny and the Repubs on domestic policy.

I also disagree with the Repubs on a lot of foreign policy,but I wlll admit that all of them (except your sainted Ron Paul) have some good points on the ME,and I agree with Obama on the ME.

I agree with Ron Paul on a couple of domestic issues, but disagree with him on most issues.

He has no integrity and no true beliefs to stand up for.

So,that's what you think of logic.

You Ron Paul groupies sound like teenyboppers mindlessly swooning over Justin Beiber,except 14 year olds are supposed to do that,it's pathetic when adults do it.

Bullshit. He's saying that although we invaded one country for no good reason, we should still neutralize another country by any means necessary for a very good reason.

Bingo!

There is no linkage between Iran and Iraq,only a uninformed person would say there is.

It's clear that TT doesn't have a problem with anyone with an R next to their name taking out Iran in the event of their nuclearization either.

Yes ,I said during the debates that at various times Romeny,Gingrich,Santorum,even Bachmann made a couple of good points about the ME.

And I said that Gingrich,Perry ,and even Ron Paul made some good points about immigration.


.

Would you like to arrange a meeting at a neutral location where we can see which of us is a pussy and which is not?

Bring it on, punk!! Get your ass to CA and I'll tell you where to find me and I'll fix your nose to the point that you'll look like a European White guy...or maybe not, as you might end up looking even more Jewish, but either way, I'm offering a free surgery.

Seriously though, my goals in life don't include beating up a middle aged Jewish lawyer who has a family and kids...that's not what I'm about. I'm not as mad at you as sometimes it looks like, but rather dissapointed that some smart Jewish people end up being like that, that idea is just painful, and hopefully you'll grow out of this and be more realistic, rather than continue to live in a fantasy world.

Be careful GF,it's against the law to hit a mentally impaired person,even if he provokes it the same way Guido provokes things.

Funny that my friend who was born and raised here still volunteered and served with the IDF. I guess some people actually believe in acting on their beliefs. Obviously you aren't that type of person.

Not every one has to serve any cause in the same way.

[302Riz]

Suck a bag of dicks alert! ^

[GanjaFreebird]

Suck a bag of dicks alert! ^

Why are you always so upset?

[GanjaFreebird]

I will do so because I agree with Obama and the Dems on domestic policy and I disagree with Romeny and the Repubs on domestic policy.

I also disagree with the Repubs on a lot of foreign policy,but I wlll admit that all of them (except your sainted Ron Paul) have some good points on the ME,and I agree with Obama on the ME.

I agree with Ron Paul on a couple of domestic issues, but disagree with him on most issues.

BINGO!!

You Ron Paul groupies sound like teenyboppers mindlessly swooning over Justin Beiber,except 14 year olds are supposed to do that,it's pathetic when adults do it.

[Freedom&Liberty]

Instead of responding to posts in his normal idiotic way, TT should save time by posting this pic -

[Guido]

As if it weren't already terrifying enough, the Iranian immanent threat just got bigger. It seems that the Evil Mullahs are plotting with the Leftist Latino Dictator Hugo Chavez to kill Americans and Terrorist.

Check this out, my threatened friends:

Through its ties with Venezuela and other nations in Latin America, Iran is building an anti-US alliance in the Western Hemisphere that poses a direct, imminent threat to the United States, an influential US lawmaker said Thursday.

The remark from House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, author of sanctions legislation targeting Iran that was recently passed by a near-unanimous vote, comes amid an increasingly visible campaign by right-wing politicians and allied institutions to build the case for further sanctions and other acts of economic warfare against the Islamic Republic – and, perhaps, set the stage for military action.

The administration of President Barack Obama has implemented stringent sanctions against Iran that have helped cripple its economy and, as the president himself noted in his State of the Union address last month, refused to take the prospect of all-out war off the table.

Its right-wing critics, however, allege the Obama administration has done too little to counter what they portray as an almost apocalyptic threat.

At a hearing Thursday of the House Foreign Affairs Committee focused on Iran’s dealings in Latin America, Norman Bailey of the conservative American Foreign Policy Council even charged that the Islamic Republic, through its allies Hezbollah, had constructed "numerous military camps inside Venezuela, as well as in South Lebanon, with the express purpose of training young Venezuelans to attack American targets."

He also claimed Iran had "established missile bases in Venezuela," though adding that those reports were as of yet "unconfirmed."

In reality, though, there is no factual basis for either claim. Indeed, were there anything to them, one would imagine US Director of National Intelligence James Clapper might have mentioned them during his Jan. 31 testimony before Congress on threats to the US.

And, indeed, reports of Iranian missiles in Venezuela were last year explicitly rejected by the Pentagon, with a spokesman saying that not only were said reports unconfirmed, but in fact there was "no evidence" to support the claim and "therefore no reason to believe the assertions… are credible."

But with Iran, no claim – from allegations of a covert nuclear weapons program to charges its providing training for the Venezuelan terrorists of tomorrow – appears too far-fetched for hawks in Washington. Latin America is but the latest anti-Tehran talking point, spurred in part by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad recent four-country tour of the region, which US policymakers have long considered their rightful sphere of influence.

During his January trip, Ahmadinejad met with heads of state in Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, and Ecuador, all countries that enjoy at best rocky relations with Washington. To those seeking further sanctions and potentially a shooting war with Iran, the trip provided for ready-made right-wing propaganda.

Regional experts, however, said the tour was more about Iran attempting to project an image of diplomatic strength amid US and European efforts at isolation than launching attacks against the US.

But such experts, with but one lone exception, were not invited to the Feb. 2 hearing called by Ros-Lehtinen, a Florida Republican. She said Iran’s relations with Latin American countries like Cuba and Venezuela posed a growing threat to the US homeland, pointing to the recent testimony from Director of National Intelligence Clapper about Iran’s alleged willingness to "conduct an attack in the United States in response to real or perceived US actions."

In particular, she charged that Iran and its alleged proxies had established deep ties with drug traffickers and other criminal organizations. "The synergy between Hezbollah and the drug cartels in Latin America makes for a very powerful enemy," said Ros-Lehtinen, one that poses "a clear and present danger."

She announced after the hearing that she was introducing another sanctions bill seeking to limit Iran’s ability to carry out electronic financial transactions, presumably with countries such as Venezuela, by far its closest ally in either Central or South America.

Ros-Lehtinen’s at-times stark rhetoric at the hearing was matched by panelist Michael Braun, the US Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) chief of operations under President George W. Bush.

Hezbollah and Iran’s Quds Force, he testified, "are now heavily involved in the global drug trade. Not only that, they "are pouring into Latin America," he continued, "thanks in large part to Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, the undisputed gatekeeper for Middle Eastern terrorist groups seeking to enter Latin America."

Additionally, the spectacular-if-true plot on behalf of some Iranian officials to assassinate the Saudi Arabian ambassador in Washington "qualifies as the perfect example of the looming threat posed by Iran’s proxies operating freely in the Western Hemisphere, and their ability to collaborate with organized crime," Braun added in prepared testimony.

The alleged plot against the Saudi ambassador is often cited by politicians in Washington as evidence of the Iranian government’s borderline irrational hostility to the US and its allies. Howard Berman, the top Democrat on the Foreign Affairs Committee, pointed to it in his own opening statement at the hearing, as did Chairwoman Ros-Lehtinen.

But while intended to demonstrate the fearful extent of Iran and its proxies’ ties to criminal organizations in Latin America and willingness to exploit them, the plot if true would suggest the Islamic Republic’s regional ties are much weaker than alleged, showing it reliant on bumbling used car salesman in Texas to reach out to the very drug cartels with which it is alleged to already enjoy strong relations.

However, in Congress leaders of both major political parties are united in playing up the alleged threat to the US posed by Iran. For his part, Berman, a California Democrat, said at the hearing that "Iran is arguably the foremost threat to United States interests in the world." Berman said "Tehran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability," as well as its "support for international terrorism," requires "extreme vigilance" on the part of the US.

Berman’s reference to Iran’s alleged pursuit of a "nuclear weapons capability" came despite the fact Director of National Intelligence Clapper testified earlier in the week that US intelligence agencies "assess Iran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons," not that its leaders have actually decided to pursue a weapons capability.

Michael Shifter, president of the Washington-based think tank Inter-American Dialogue, was the lone witness at the hearing to portray Iran’s activities in Latin America as less than threatening – and even rather pathetic.

Though Latin America as a whole is enjoying increased assertiveness and independence from the US in terms of foreign affairs, Shifter said, it has no real desire to enter into a meaningful alliance with a pariah like Iran.

While leaders of Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, and Ecuador may share the Islamic Republic’s view of the US empire, and are more than willing to entertain Iran’s offers of aid – even if said aid never materializes, as has more often than not been the case – their relations are largely rhetorical in nature. They are also, notably, countries that are small, poor, and of little or waning influence.

And while some on the US right have alleged Iranian operatives are conducting terror training camps in Venezuela and perhaps elsewhere in Latin America, Shifter noted there is "no convincing evidence that such activities are taking place," which is particularly "noteworthy in light of what are presumably vigorous efforts by US intelligence agencies to gather pertinent intelligence."

As such, the US should not let Iran’s diplomatic forays in its perceived sphere of influence cause it to lash out and punish the region for talking to a longtime foe.

"Invoking the Monroe Doctrine in this day and age would be very misguided and would alienate our closest Latin American friends," Shifter testified. "It would ultimately be self-defeating."


http://original.antiwar.com/charles-...america/print/

[86Dùde]

I never been more skeered in my entire life.

[Šñøü†ê®]

The remark from House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, author of sanctions legislation targeting Iran that was recently passed by a near-unanimous vote...

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a sick, delusional, satanic, lobby controlled beast.

[Guido]

I never been more skeered in my entire life.

You got that fuckin-A right, Daddy-O. With this latest thing [TERRORIST] about that Latino dictator Chavez teaming up with [ANTI-SEMITIC] hEZbollah and Iran [TERRORIST] i'M wetting my pants, I mean what does qualify as a TOP THREAT TO AMERICA?????TERRORIST

[Guido]

More confirmation for what I wrote earlier in this thread (i.e., the threat is that of deterrance, not attack):



Iran and the Threat of Not Having Future Wars

by Peter Hart




The conventional understanding you get from the media is that Israel is worried that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a serious threat to the country's existence.

Is that really what's happening, though? Another interpretation is that Iran might want nuclear weapons not to launch any such an attack but to prevent an attack on its country--nuclear deterrence, in other words. (Of course, it's important to note that there is currently no evidence that Iran is pursuing a weapons program.)

I was struck when I heard Israeli journalist Ronen Bergman bring up some of these ideas on NPR's Talk of the Nation on January 30. Bergman is no outsider critic of Israeli policy; when he appeared recently on the NewsHour (1/12/12) and was asked about the assassination of Iranian scientists, his answer was: "I don't know. And even if I knew, I would tell you that I don't know."

Here's what he said on NPR, appearing to talk about his New York Times magazine piece on Israel and Iran:


NEAL CONAN: Chris, thanks very much for the call. Israel itself possesses, what, 300 nuclear weapons we believe, maybe more? Why does not deterrence work? Israel, of course, would retaliate if Iran were to use a nuclear weapon.

BERGMAN: I would assume that--oh, I know that most of Israel's leaders do not believe that Iran is going to use nuclear weapons against Israel. The problem is not the nuclear threat. The Iranians are not stupid. They want to live.... And I think that most leaders, and me personally as well, see that there are only a few people who believe that Iran would be hesitant enough to--sorry, brutal enough and stupid enough to use nuclear weapon against Israel.

The problem is that once Iran acquires this ability, it would change the balance of power in the Middle East. And a country that possesses nuclear weapon is a different country when it comes to support proxy jihadist movement. And these Israeli leaders afraid would significantly narrow down the variety of options from the point of view of Israel, just to quote one example coming from Minister of Defense Barak, when he said, just imagine--he told me in a meeting we had on the 13th of January in his house--said, just imagine, Ronen, that tomorrow we go into another war with Hezbollah in Lebanon like we did in 2006, and this time we are determined to take them out. But Iran comes forward and say, to attack Hezbollah is like attacking Iran, and we threaten you with nuclear weaponry.

Now, Minister of Defense Barak says it's not necessarily that we would be threatened not to attack, and we would decide to cancel the war, but it would certainly make us think twice.

In other words, Israel's position might be that an nuclear-armed Iran could make it harder to have future wars. That's a very different discussion from the one we're having now.


http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/02/04-1?print

Personally, I think that a change in the balance of power (including mutual deterrance) is the best thing that could possibly happen in the Middle East.

[GanjaFreebird]

You got that fuckin-A right, Daddy-O. With this latest thing [TERRORIST] about that Latino dictator Chavez teaming up with [ANTI-SEMITIC] hEZbollah and Iran [TERRORIST] i'M wetting my pants, I mean what does qualify as a TOP THREAT TO AMERICA?????TERRORIST

Oh, don't worry, you will be wetting your pants once America and/or Israel takes care of Iran. Chavez has a serious form of cancer and hopefully he lives long enough to see Iran get its ass kicked, kinda like the last surviving bad guy in an action movie who gets REALLY angry and crazy right before his end.

And once Iran/Syria is no longer a problem, what the fuck do you think Hezbullah and Hamas will do? Cry to mommy? Who is going to protect them THEN? You?

[GanjaFreebird]

Personally, I think that a change in the balance of power (including mutual deterrance) is the best thing that could possibly happen in the Middle East.

Why?

[86Dùde]

Uh huh. Just going to do away with them are we?

[GanjaFreebird]

Uh huh. Just going to do away with them are we?

What do you mean by that?

[86Dùde]

Look, it's OK to preach war I suppose, but you haven't considered any of the repercussions. Your pride doesn't leave room for any of the unintended results of cause and effect. It's just bomb, bomb, bomb to you.

[302Riz]

Look, it's OK to preach war I suppose, but you haven't considered any of the repercussions. Your pride doesn't leave room for any of the unintended results of cause and effect. It's just bomb, bomb, bomb to you.

He has absolutely no respect for life.

[86Dùde]

I could already probably write his counter argument to your assertion.

[GanjaFreebird]

Look, it's OK to preach war I suppose, but you haven't considered any of the repercussions. Your pride doesn't leave room for any of the unintended results of cause and effect. It's just bomb, bomb, bomb to you

BUT I HAVE!! That's why I'm saying let's do it RIGHT NOW before Iran is strong enough to make us regret anything.

If I didn't think two steps ahead, I'd say that we can always do it later, but I don't, I want to fuck them up right now while they still can't really fight back, because once they CAN fight back, it would be too late and they would have wayyyyy too much power in the mid-east.

[Šñøü†ê®]

^Hitler Wannabe Alert

[86Dùde]

More like foreign policy 1001 Epic Fail.