PDA

View Full Version : Sarah Palin New Sarah Palin Editorial: It's time to get tough with Iran




RonPaulFanInGA
12-21-2010, 04:47 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-12-22-column22_ST2_N.htm

Matt Collins
12-21-2010, 05:03 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nv9QiL2p0dk

emazur
12-21-2010, 05:09 PM
Arab leaders in the region rightly fear a nuclear-armed Iran. We suspected this before, but now we know for sure because of leaked diplomatic cables. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia "frequently exhorted the U.S. to attack Iran to put an end to its nuclear weapons program," according to these communications. Officials from Jordan said the Iranian nuclear program should be stopped by any means necessary.

So Arab leaders fearing Iran might obtain WMDs is a justification for war? And might these leaked diplomatic cables come from Wikileaks which Palin has so condemned?

oyarde
12-21-2010, 05:14 PM
So Arab leaders fearing Iran might obtain WMDs is a justification for war? And might these leaked diplomatic cables come from Wikileaks which Palin has so condemned?

Perfectly understandable that Jordan and the Kingdom of Saud would prefer an Iran without nukes .

oyarde
12-21-2010, 05:15 PM
We would be insane to get involved in Iran .

emazur
12-21-2010, 05:16 PM
Perfectly understandable that Jordan and the Kingdom of Saud would prefer an Iran without nukes .

Sure but that doesn't make it America's responsibility

oyarde
12-21-2010, 05:19 PM
Sure but that doesn't make it America's responsibility

That is correct .

lester1/2jr
12-21-2010, 05:20 PM
these people are unelelected tyrants. They don't even have the fig leaf of democracy to PRETEND they represent their people not that that means all that much.

You think random people in Saudi Arabia or Jordan give a crap about Iran enough to cheer for the US? It's laughable.


grade: F

HOLLYWOOD
12-21-2010, 05:23 PM
Perfectly understandable that Jordan and the Kingdom of Saud would prefer an Iran without nukes .
Yes, and we know where Jordan and the Saudi's receive many of their US Dollars, besides HUGE investments of profits and secuirty in the rigged "No LOSE Wall street insider markets" CLUB.

Federal Reserve, US Treasury, and Washington DC ensure to protect FOREIGN Investment of any type... right Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud?

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2449950876

Lucille
12-21-2010, 05:23 PM
Oh dear. Kristol's sock puppet is at it again. Why is it they always pick the most holy times of the year to call for crippling sanctions that only hurt the Iranian people, and more war?

That woman and her handlers are despicable.

oyarde
12-21-2010, 05:23 PM
these people are unelelected tyrants. They don't even have the fig leaf of democracy to PRETEND they represent their people not that that means all that much.

You think random people in Saudi Arabia or Jordan give a crap about Iran enough to cheer for the US? It's laughable.


grade: F

That random people remark about Jordan & Saud is likely correct , very observant .

lester1/2jr
12-21-2010, 05:24 PM
Why is it they always pick the most holy times of the year to call for more war?



I honestly believe that was intentional. She did this on Easter I think too.

oyarde
12-21-2010, 05:24 PM
Oh dear. Kristol's sock puppet is at it again. Why is it they always pick the most holy times of the year to call for more war?

That woman and her handlers are despicable.

They do this at Easter too ??

oyarde
12-21-2010, 05:24 PM
I honestly believe that was intentional. She did this on Easter I think too.

wth ?

Lucille
12-21-2010, 05:26 PM
I honestly believe that was intentional. She did this on Easter I think too.

That's how I remember it.

agar
12-21-2010, 10:41 PM
I notice that Palin references Wikileaks cables as a source of info to support her warmongering against Iran.

Many people are now saying that Wiki is a vehicle to put out poison pills which support neo con objectives. Wiki is also saying that Pakistan is protecting Bin Laden (who died many years ago)

I think Palin and Wiki and Beck and Bibi and Kristol are all part of the same con game. Palin's probably too dumb to even understand the big picture. She just submits whatever Kristol writes for her.

Dark_Horse_Rider
12-21-2010, 10:46 PM
I notice that Palin references Wikileaks cables as a source of info to support her warmongering against Iran.

Many people are now saying that Wiki is a vehicle to put out poison pills which support neo con objectives. Wiki is also saying that Pakistan is protecting Bin Laden (who died many years ago)

I think Palin and Wiki and Beck and Bibi and Kristol are all part of the same con game. Palin's probably too dumb to even understand the big picture. She just submits whatever Kristol writes for her.

It would be so easy and convenient for wiki leaks to be used the way you mention above.

agar
12-21-2010, 10:57 PM
It would be so easy and convenient for wiki leaks to be used the way you mention above.

Yep.

You see, when the US or Israel makes a claim, nobody believes them anymore. But if the "courageous fugitive" Julian Assange of Wikileaks "leaks" a cable - that contains a certain claim that TPTB want publicized - then its accepted automatically as truth. "Leaked cables have now confirmed...blah, blah, blah"

A clever trick. That's why the Establishment media is hyping this Wikileaks stuff IMO.

cswake
12-21-2010, 11:19 PM
Hey, why not. We have rested troops to spare, a gigantic budget surplus, and an overwhelming urge to make the world even safe for democracy after our successes in Iraq and Afghanistan.

lester1/2jr
12-22-2010, 10:12 AM
the neocons are condmening wikileaks and using the wikileaks information as some sort of validation, which it isn't at all. Just a typical day at the office for these hypcritical maniacs.

driller80545
12-22-2010, 10:17 AM
Hey, why not. We have rested troops to spare, a gigantic budget surplus, and an overwhelming urge to make the world even safe for democracy after our successes in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Right, and Saudi Arabia could never afford to defend themselves. (Or Israel either for that matter)

lester1/2jr
12-22-2010, 10:36 AM
Why don't we just support al queda against Iran the way we did in afghsniatan in the 80's? No way that could come back to haunt us.

driller80545
12-22-2010, 10:42 AM
Why don't we just support al queda against Iran the way we did in afghsniatan in the 80's? No way that could come back to haunt us.

Ha! Shh, don't give em any ideas.

specsaregood
12-22-2010, 10:42 AM
these people are unelelected tyrants. They don't even have the fig leaf of democracy to PRETEND they represent their people not that that means all that much.
You think random people in Saudi Arabia or Jordan give a crap about Iran enough to cheer for the US? It's laughable.
grade: F

And yet Iran is a democracy.......our allies are an unelected tyrranical monarchy and our supposed enemy is a democracy......

sailingaway
12-22-2010, 10:49 AM
This is what happens when you listen to Kristol on a regular basis.

Having said that, the possibility of missile bases in Venezuala DO bug me....although I'm not sure we are certain of the facts there, yet.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2010-10/21/content_11441817.htm

amonasro
12-22-2010, 11:20 AM
We would be insane to get involved in Iran .

We would have been insane to get involved in the World Wars and Vietnam. That certainly didn't stop us.

This is all very disheartening. At the bookstore newsstand yesterday I noticed a couple propaganda cover stories on Iran and Muslims. Here we go again...

TheDriver
12-22-2010, 11:29 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-12-22-column22_ST2_N.htm

Someone should ask her who she wants to borrow the money from to go to war with Iran - The Fed or China?

fisharmor
12-22-2010, 11:37 AM
Hey, why not. We have rested troops to spare, a gigantic budget surplus, and an overwhelming urge to make the world even safe for democracy after our successes in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This is what I don't get.
We have about 4,000 years of history to examine to try to figure out what goes into a successful conquest.
History makes it quite clear that raping the country you invaded is necessary. Otherwise you run out of resources. Hell, even Axis & Allies shows that.
Moving in and depleting your own resources in an attempt to make changes that are incompatible with thousands of years of history and tradition isn't exactly the way to keep your world domination going.

Also, history makes it clear that unless you're willing to take part in abominations, conquests don't last. If you hesitate to exterminate 10% or more of the population, they're eventually going to kick you out.

Palin needs to be told, preferably in front of a camera, that unless we start shipping every single drop of Iraqi oil over here, and until we tell Afghans that anyone not living in an approved city center will be shot on sight, Iran just isn't going to happen.

Madly_Sane
12-22-2010, 11:39 AM
Well, fuck you Palin, you're an idiot. We shouldn't get involved with anymore countries in the Middle East, we shouldn't even be in the Middle East to begin with!

Romulus
12-22-2010, 11:43 AM
I hope she keeps talking. The more she talks, the better WE look!

specsaregood
12-22-2010, 11:45 AM
Someone should ask her who she wants to borrow the money from to go to war with Iran - The Fed or China?

You have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later.

I would LOVE to see that question posed to her.

lester1/2jr
12-22-2010, 11:51 AM
I was talking to a hawk guy on another forum. He would never address the cost issue. The media is the same way. 60 minutes will do a thing on the economy and then a thing on Afghanistan with no connection made between the two.

TNforPaul45
12-22-2010, 11:55 AM
We have a charge by god to take freedom to Iran, so we should invade over Christmas while they are opening their heathen presents.

It's our duty to police the world since we won dubya dubya two. Only by force of strength can we bring democracy to them. Besides, we can use the oil from their oilfields to pay for the war.

After that, we will take care of north Korea and then Russia and china, make them know their damn roles. Stupid foreigners. Don't they know America is good and they are all bad? If Lincoln were alive, he would crush all of them and do the will of jesus and free the shit out of them.

Freaking jack Bauer would show them Arabs what to do, them freaking animals! People who don't wanna invade them isn't thinking of the safety of our troops! Our troops Want to win dammit! Stupid gays!

...this Christmas neoconservative horror brought to you by TNforPaul45

YumYum
12-22-2010, 11:59 AM
For someone who couldn't hit the butt of an elephant when hunting she sure comes across as an authority on the subject of killing. Sadly, this woman is going to be our next president, since she has AIPAC's backing. The Mayans were right. 2012 is going to be a time of change.

Heimdallr
12-22-2010, 11:59 AM
Apparently Jordan and Saudi Arabia are more important to SP than the USA. :P

driller80545
12-22-2010, 12:00 PM
We have a charge by god to take freedom to Iran, so we should invade over Christmas while they are opening their heathen presents.

It's our duty to police the world since we won dubya dubya two. Only by force of strength can we bring democracy to them. Besides, we can use the oil from their oilfields to pay for the war.

After that, we will take care of north Korea and then Russia and china, make them know their damn roles. Stupid foreigners. Don't they know America is good and they are all bad? If Lincoln were alive, he would crush all of them and do the will of jesus and free the shit out of them.

Freaking jack Bauer would show them Arabs what to do, them freaking animals! People who don't wanna invade them isn't thinking of the safety of our troops! Our troops Want to win dammit! Stupid gays!

...this Christmas neoconservative horror brought to you by TNforPaul45

Priceless!

JohnEngland
12-22-2010, 01:15 PM
I used to have much more respect for Palin - as in the pre-McCain era. But now, it's war, war, war, bomb here, kill there, talk about christmas and how baby jesus would want us to bomb women and children free iran, kill some more, borrow more from china, go further into debt, talk about how spending is out of control, spend another trillion... blablabla...

JohnEngland
12-22-2010, 01:18 PM
For someone who couldn't hit the butt of an elephant when hunting she sure comes across as an authority on the subject of killing. Sadly, this woman is going to be our next president, since she has AIPAC's backing. The Mayans were right. 2012 is going to be a time of change.

I don't think she's running, but I guess we'll find out in a few months! US elections are always so exciting... the world is watching!

agar
12-22-2010, 01:28 PM
Beneath the folsky, "you betcha" hockey mom/huntress facade lies an EXTREMLY ambitious and cunning woman. Lady MacBeth got nothing on this bitch.

specsaregood
12-22-2010, 02:01 PM
For someone who couldn't hit the butt of an elephant when hunting she sure comes across as an authority on the subject of killing
You clearly haven't watched her awesome reality show.

Brian4Liberty
12-22-2010, 02:17 PM
Oh dear. Kristol's sock puppet is at it again. Why is it they always pick the most holy times of the year to call for crippling sanctions that only hurt the Iranian people, and more war?

That woman and her handlers are despicable.

Yep, another editorial ghost written by Kristol.

I ran into a hard-core Palin supporter recently. They were proud to say that they are neo-conservative and want to fully implement PNAC philosophy. They didn't care how many innocent women and children they had to kill to bring "democracy" to the "terrorist" nations.

dean.engelhardt
12-22-2010, 02:23 PM
The US stance against Iran is not tough enough?


Estimates of deaths during sanctions
Estimates of excess deaths during sanctions vary depending on the source. The estimates vary [24][30] due to differences in methodologies, and specific time-frames covered.[31] A short listing of estimates follows:

Unicef: 500,000 children (including sanctions, collateral effects of war). "[As of 1999] [c]hildren under 5 years of age are dying at more than twice the rate they were ten years ago."[24][32]
Former U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq Denis Halliday: "Two hundred thirty-nine thousand children 5 years old and under" as of 1998.[6]
Iraqi Baathist government: 1.5 million.[22]
Iraqi Cultural Minister Hammadi: 1.7 million (includes sanctions, bombs and other weapons, depleted uranium poisoning) [33]
"probably ... 170,000 children", Project on Defense Alternatives, "The Wages of War", 20. October 2003[34]
350,000 excess deaths among children "even using conservative estimates", Slate Explainer, "Are 1 Million Children Dying in Iraq?", 9. October 2001.[35]
"Richard Garfield, a Columbia University nursing professor ... cited the figures 345,000-530,000 for the entire 1990-2002 period"[36] for sanctions-related excess deaths.[37]
Zaidi, S. and Fawzi, M. C. S., The Lancet (1995, estimate withdrawn in 1997):567,000 children.[9]
Editor (then "associate editor and media columnist") Matt Welch,[38] Reason Magazine, 2002: "It seems awfully hard not to conclude that the embargo on Iraq has ... contributed to more than 100,000 deaths since 1990."[22][37]
Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark: 1.5 million (includes sanctions, bombs and other weapons, depleted uranium poisoning).[39]
British Member of Parliament George Galloway: "a million Iraqis, most of them children."[40]
Economist Michael Spagat: "very likely to be [less than] than half a million children."[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_sanctions)