« Four- and Six-Year-Old “Sex Offenders”; Middle School Midol Dealers
No chance of dealing with the problem so you might as well outlaw conversation about it (anorexia) »

And Remember, Buchanan is a Paleocon Who Opposed the Iraq War

(posted by Mona)

Via Crooks and Liars: The McLaughlin Group: Pat Buchanan Says There’s A 50/50 Chance Of Air Strikes Against Iran By Fall.

This entry was posted on Monday, April 14th, 2008 at 12:21 pm

Categories: GOP morons, imperialism, neoconservatives, the war in iraq.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

Advertisement:


8 Responses to “And Remember, Buchanan is a Paleocon Who Opposed the Iraq War”

  1. TGGP Says:
    April 14th, 2008 at 11:56 pm

    Tradesports has odds here.

    I don’t think it will happen.

  2. kevin_carson Says:
    April 15th, 2008 at 9:04 am

    The odds may go higher than that, depending on the polls on October.

  3. kevin_carson Says:
    April 15th, 2008 at 9:43 am

    The Democrats don’t help, BTW. One favorite meme of theirs is “Iraq detracts from the REAL threat, which is X.” In 2004, for example, Kerry kept stressing that the Iraq reduced the resources available for countering the “Iranian threat.” And the mention of Saudi Arabia in the Crooks and Liars piece mirrors many of the neocons themselves, who want to go after the “radical Wahhabists.”

  4. Keith Preston Says:
    April 15th, 2008 at 11:09 am

    Even Bob Barr, whom I initially had some hopes for, has gotten in this “The Real Threat is…” act.

    http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=12689

    I actually kind of like having the Imperial Guard bogged down in the Middle East. I want the resistance movements in Latin America to have a fighting chance at victory, instead of suffering a fate along the lines of Chile in the 70s or Central America in the 80s.

  5. Mona Says:
    April 15th, 2008 at 1:44 pm

    “Iraq detracts from the REAL threat, which is X.”

    AQ in Afghanistan, and somewhat relocated — especially in Pakistan just over the border — but also reviving in Afghanistan, is, in my view, a real and serious threat. I did not and do not oppose taking them and the Taliban out.

    But Iraq and Iran have squat to do with that — which is to say, the people who actually attacked the U.S. on 9/11.

    Further, we have destabilized Iraq, and if Iran — which borders Iraq, and given its bloody history with Iraq — thinks it has an interest in who ends up in power there, all I can say is: “Duh.”

  6. Natasha Says:
    April 16th, 2008 at 4:01 pm

    Mona,

    There is the serious question of whether or not U.S. war in Afgan. or Pakistan inflames the threat further rather than seriously countering it.

    The more dead civilians you have: the more propaganda victories you hand to Bin Laden. And I am not so sure that NATO/the U.S. can wage war effectively without seriously harming innocents. After all, the Taliban is just another one of Afghan.’s thuggish group of militants. And they have some degree of popular support in the south of the country (I think).

    I am not saying that this makes them any less illegitimate, but I don’t want to see the U.S. bombing villages to get at holed up Taliban insurgents.

  7. Mona Says:
    April 16th, 2008 at 4:31 pm

    I am not saying that this makes them any less illegitimate, but I don’t want to see the U.S. bombing villages to get at holed up Taliban insurgents.

    Most certainly. I’m not advocating Dresden-style bombings, and would find them to constitute war crimes. But I do believe toppling the AQ-supporting Taliban was utterly justified, as was staying there to prop up an embryonic govt.

    But no, instead we have 140,000 troops in Iraq, which had zero to do with AQ and its attacks on the U.S. With many of the same cheerleaders now using that war as an excuse to attack Iran. Thus making it rather obvious to the world that the Powers that Be in the U.S. are using 9/11 as an imperialist excuse to wage war and occupy any Muslim country it wants to.

  8. TGGP Says:
    April 16th, 2008 at 6:07 pm

    In my view we accomplished what we needed to pretty early in the Afghan war. Since then we have been propping up a government or acting as a government ourselves. I say we get out and leave Afghanistan for the Afghanistanis. If al Qaeda becomes a problem we can always invade again.

Leave a Reply

To help us filter out spam, please type a number to answer this question: 4 + 4 =