WORLD WAR III

"the comments of the British Foreign minister yesterday when he TOTALLY rejected any preemptive use of nuclear weapons"

He'll fall into line once the big boys get going.

I find it hard to believe that a nuclear weapon would be a first choice for an attack. When using such a weapon many things have to be taken into consideration. Not only will the facility attacked be destroyed, but also all living things within a certain distance will automatically be destroyed as well. Then we'll have a fallout, where the nuclear radiation could travel to countries nearby and further perhaps. The destruction could be more than just a facility but millions will die not just from the first few minute or hours, but for years to come. This is why I have to refuse to believe that a pre-emptive strike with a nuclear weapon will just not happen. Only if the danger seems impossible to stop by any other means such as diplomacy, sanctions and non-nuclear military weapons, then "maybe" nuclear can be considered if the enemy will use their nuclear weapons as well.

I think you guys are going to far saying that Bush will shoot nuclear weapons first and ask questions later. He may be an idiot at times but I don't think he's that stupid. I believe this is an exaggeration. This sounds more like something from a paranoid person. I could be wrong though.

Let me do some of COL Gene's homework for him. Here's an actual link to Seymour Hersh's story: CNN interview with Wolf Blitzer

First of all, could it be that Seymour Hersh is wrong?

Having said that, wouldn't it be the same people who griped that the Bush administration doesn't have contingency plans for every possible outcome that are griping now that we have a contingency plan for this outcome? Be honest, you'd be even more upset if we didn't have a plan for dealing with the Iranian nuclear threat.

And Hersh is needlessly hamming this up, throwing around words like "messianic" in describing Bush's alleged zeal for nuking Iran's nukes. What a waste of bandwidth this article is.

The question was that the use of such a weapon was PART of the discussion. The use of a nuclear weapon could cause the things mentioned although a penetrating type weapon would minimize the release of radiation and collateral danger. The first issue would be the reaction of the Moslem world toward the United States for just using a nuclear weapon on a Moslem country. That I believe would begin WWIII.

Maybe this is a stupid question but, does it matter if it is a nuke?

If you are blowing up a nuclear facility something is going to leak out.

I am glad that all options are on the table. I hope that the threat of destruction by any available means is enough to bring Iran to the table.

I don't think sending in a tactical nuke would be the start of WWIII. The rest of the Moslem world should be happy that we are trying to intervene. What happens when one of the other countries pisses them off? Do you think they will show restraint? Do you really want to think of Iran as a nuclear super power?

The question was that the use of such a weapon was PART of the discussion. The use of a nuclear weapon could cause the things mentioned although a penetrating type weapon would minimize the release of radiation and collateral danger. The first issue would be the reaction of the Moslem world toward the United States for just using a nuclear weapon on a Moslem country. That I believe would begin WWIII.

Col, you being military makes me wonder just how smart you really are. This is a conflict with a country more powerful than Iraq that claims to already have means to deliver a nuclear weapon and might already have one. It is only smart to have the idea on the tables for 2 reasons, 1 to show Iran that we are not kidding and that we will not hesitate to use force if necessary to stop them, 2 in the case that they do have a nuke are might consider using or use it, we will already have a strategy to defend ourselves. To have the nuke idea on the table does not mean it’s the only alternative. What other alternatives do we have on the table as well? Do you even know? Why only be concerned with the nuke on the table when we could use other means to get similar results without the radiation. We have so many types of weapons including very powerful bunkerbuster type bombs that could yield really good results. This, as I said before, is just a great exaggeration of an article with a very stupid question.

A military that doesn't have contingency plans for every weapon and every means possible isn't fit. It's facetious to say that we should have nuclear weapons and then have no plans drawn up to use them. The Col obviously goes down the news headlines thinking "Now, where's my anti-Bush hook in this?"

I don't think we should use nuclear weapons for this job, nor do I think we ever would. To spent billions on weapons and never consider how to use them would be idiotic, though. If the article was about how we have no clue how to use all these expensive nuclear weapons, the Col would be right here demanding to know why we don't plan for these things.

Transparent, as usual.

As I said, Bush had better listen to his senior Military. We saw what happened when he did not follow the war plans in Iraq. I do not think his National Guard Service, or lack of it, qualifies him to know the consequences of various types of military actions. A united Moslem world opposing us would be WORSE then Iran getting nuclear weapons. WE can only use nuclear weapons if attacked not preemptively!

Today another senior General called the conduct of the Iraq War a grave error. Gen Powell also admitted we did not have enough troops in Iraq and the current sectarian violence is the result of that action. It is clear Bush and Rummy have totally screwed up Iraq and are responsible for MOST of the American deaths and injuries.

Odd. Bush declassifying information is a high crime, and yet when someone offers information on strategic plans and ongoing military action you eat it up.

How did we get this information, Col? How do you feel when you look at your blog and see yourself on the one hand vilifying scooter libby, and an inch higher making your bones with much, much more damaging, "leaked" intelligence? If it is just irrational guesswork, then you're a tool for people like Hersh. If it isn't, you're a vapid hypocrite.

So which is it? Is this blog based on irresponsible rumor, or are you lauding a leak much, much worse than the "unforgivable offense" you cite on your blog? Pony up, grow a backbone, and deal with your knee-jerk politics head-on for once. You want to know why people don't take you seriously, that's why.

Bush declassifying information is a high crime, and yet when someone offers information on strategic plans and ongoing military action you eat it up.

When it's Bush or Libby, he's irresponsible. When it's Seymour Hersh, he's a whistle-blower. It's amazing that people don't see the dichotomy in that.

More than just a whistle-blower, though. According to what I read, these are troops on the ground, at the moment, trying to work covertly as their presence is announced in the national media. Me, I'd be seeing how long Hersh will sit in jail before he gives up his source, same as the Plamegate reporter.

The Col, though, he laps it up and makes a case against Bush out of it, about an inch above where he screams about the President "leaking" information that was in his power to leak...

The BS is unreal.

First, the issue with the Hersh story is with the source that provided classified information to Hersh not with Hersh. Once a reporter is given information under our system they can report it under freedom of speech and of the press. The issue of providing a reporter's sources must be limited to situations where the need for those sources is so great as to be essential to protect our vital security.

The actions of Bush and Cheney and their two assistants is a VERY different matter.

Bush and Cheney released the sensitive information to discredit a person who had the nerve to provide information that contradicted the President. The outing of Mrs. Wilson had nothing to do with if Saddam had WMD it was to punish Wilson and his wife. Libby has admitted that was the purpose of the release of the information. It was a concerted plan by the White House to get Wilson for saying that what Bush and Cheney were telling us about the threat from Saddam was NOT CORRECT. To date it has not been documented if either Bush or Cheney directed the outing of Mrs. Wilson but it was Rove that was the FIRST to identify her and Libby confirmed that fact.

The other release of classified issue was the PARTIAL declassification and release of Intelligence from the PDB. Bush declassifies the parts of the document that supported his arguments that Saddam had a nuclear program while concealing other sections of that VERY SAMR DOCUMENT that showed Saddam DID NOT have a nuclear program the way the Wilson report stated. The part of the PDB that Bush declassified and released has been proven incorrect and the section that Bush kept secret was CORRECT and in agreement with the Wilson Report that Bush and Cheney attacked Wilson and his wife for making public.

Bush stands up and condemns the release of sensitive information while doing that very thing himself.

He said he wanted to get to the bottom of WHO provided the sensitive information when it was Him and Cheney from the PDB information and Rove and Libby for the outing of Mrs. Wilson. Bush can not have it both ways. If release of SENSATIC+VE information harms this country, they WHY is Bush and Cheney as well as their two assistants releasing sensitive information? If as Bush said yesterday that he declassified and released information from the PDB to give the public the information about our security then WHY DUD HE KEEP SECRET those sections that showed Saddam was NOT A DANGER? If the object is to provide the information to make the true nature of the danger from Saddam clear you do not selectively release only that Intelligence that supports one position while keep other information that shows the opposite position secret. Bush used his power to classify and declassify for political PAY BACK and to provide a one sided argument that time has proven was INCORRECRT. The CORRECT Intelligence is what BUSH kept secret!

Sorry for the typo's. The system will not let me EDIT my post. WHY?

Nice to see that the C.O.L. has resorted to stealing topics and discussions from others rather than joining into discussions that wouldn't allow him to side-track and bash Bush: Should the west nuke Iran 'til it glows?

Stop feeding the troll here people. Let his posts sit unanswered. Anyone stupid enough to believe the crap put forth by the resident fool of JU gets what they deserve. The only thing anyone replying to these threads is doing (besides perhaps smacking down a very lame attempt at plagurizing topics from others) is giving others an opportunity to mark his trolling replies for what they are.

Terpfan 1980

I did not steal ANYTHING. You are just a stupid blind Bush Supporters that will not look what this man is doing to our country. No matter, the harm is done and you too will be paying for the Bush/Cheney mistakes for decades to come.

"The actions of Bush and Cheney and their two assistants is a VERY different matter."

Yes, being in charge of US intelligence they actually have the right to release classified material as they see fit. Unnames "sources" in the Pentagon who give reporters facts about ongoing covert military operations are undermining the safety of those forces.

Bush was refering to sensitive information, not information he'd chosen to leak. If Plame had been found to have been a covert agent, i.e. that Bush had been misinformed about the situation, then someone would have needed to answer for the slip. So far, no one has been able to point to sensitive information that was leaked.

So, you really don't give a crap about sensitive information or national security. Hersh broadcast to the world that we have military personel in Iran and you couldn't care less. The President declassifies something and it is a scandal. This is, as always, just another excercise to see how much you can twist in favor of anti-Bush propaganda, and others could be beheading people in the streets and you wouldn't care.

This has nothing to do with "right” It has to do with abusing the power of the president to distort the facts and only release what HE WANTEWD RELEASED. It has to do with telling us how much harm releasing sensitive information had on this country as he was doing just that via Cheney, Libby and Rove.

"This has nothing to do with "right”"

Amen to that. Hope the honesty didn't hurt.

"It has to do with abusing the power of the president to distort the facts and only release what HE WANTEWD RELEASED. "

Deciding what should be told to the public isn't an abuse of power, it is his rightful power. The congressional intelligence committee had full access to the omitted parts and it didn't seem to matter much.

"It has to do with telling us how much harm releasing sensitive information had on this country as he was doing just that via Cheney, Libby and Rove."

Yes, and how little you seem to care if anyone else does it. Again, you are honest. This isn't about WWIII, this is just about your political hatred.

It has to do with abusing the power of the president to distort the facts and only release what HE WANTEWD RELEASED.

How is declasifying something distorting the facts? BTW, the Constitution that you uphold so much gives the President the power to clasify and declasify at will, seems you have yet to understand that. Are you that thick Col? This is not abusing power, this is using the power given to him by law, you're one hell of a genius Col.

It has to do with telling us how much harm releasing sensitive information had on this country as he was doing just that via Cheney, Libby and Rove.

Exactly what Baker said, but I don't expect you to understand or accept it either. It's only bad if Bush does it, right?

Bakerstreet


When you release some information that supports what the president wants and keep secret other Intelligence in the SAME document that disproves what he is saying it is ALL about of deceiving Congress and the American People.

As it turns out, that which Bush choose to declassify and release was wrong and what HE CHOOSE TO KEEP CLASSIFIED AND HIDDEN WAS CORRECT.

WHEN YOU RELEASE SOME INFORMATION TO DISCRDIT SOMEONE THAT WAS TELLING US THE TRUTH THAT YOU DIID NOT WANT RELEASED THAT IS DEAD WRONG.

CharlesC

It is bad whenever sensitive information is released. But to have the leader of our country engage in this process is even worse. He above all should know better. It is all about politics. Not what is best for the country but what Bush thinks is best for GWB.

I did not steal ANYTHING. You are just a stupid blind Bush Supporters that will not look what this man is doing to our country. No matter, the harm is done and you too will be paying for the Bush/Cheney mistakes for decades to come.

I'll feed the troll here one last time...

First and foremost, you are several days late and many dollars short -- worse than that damned deficit you keep crying about -- in writing the above article. You know it, the world now knows it too.

Second, your village called, they want their idiot back.

Third, as to any discussion you make above about Bush accepting advise from any military advisors, if they are anything like the likes of you, then I want him to run as far and as fast away from that advice as possible. Listen to qualified advice, sure. Listen to morons with liberal agendas and axes to grind? No way.


Somewhere there's a bridge missing it's troll... hopefully those villagers won't find you before the ones looking for their idiot get to you.

There is a village missing its idiot. The place is Crawford, Texas. I served my country and not by hiding in the National Guard and failing to obey orders. I did not run any companies in the ground or lose my divers license because of DWI. I got into college and my commission by my own efforts not because of my father's contacts. I did not send over 2,350 troops to the death for NO GOOD REASON.

There is a village missing its idiot. The place is Crawford, Texas. I served my country and not by hiding in the National Guard and failing to obey orders. I did not run any companies in the ground or lose my divers license because of DWI. I got into college and my commission by my own efforts not because of my father's contacts. I did not send over 2,350 troops to the death for NO GOOD REASON.

Hey your one remaining brain cell phoned in. Seems it's lonely!

I will match brain Cells with you any day and come our way ahead.

I see Gen Powell has joined the chorus of senior military that admit the way the Iraq War was conducted was wrong. Not enough troops just like Bush was told by the military and Ambassador Bremer. Bush is such an idiot. Only problem I see is we need to clean house- Bush, Cheney and Rummy need to go!