Free Dating Site    

If McCain gets in Iran's CERTAINLY going to get hit - just look at his public statements on Iran.

oh come on-
aren't you always the one who voices against fear mongering?

Presidential candidate John McCain shocked observers on Sunday when he told a crowd of supporters, "There's going to be other wars. ... I'm sorry to tell you, there's going to be other wars. We will never surrender but there will be other wars."

:: he didn't say promise. what he said was, make no mistake, there are going to be more wars. that is straight talk, to be quite frank, joe. you get john mccain in the white house, and i do believe we'll be at war with iraq. that's one of the things that makes me very nervous about him. i think we need an eisenhower, who got us out of korea or a nixon who tried to get us out of vietnam with honor. i think that's the kind of president this country needs. there's no doubt john mccain is going to be a war president. can anybody see john mccain as sort of a peace-time calvin coolidge president? it's preposterous. his whole career is wrapped up in the military, national security. he's in putin's face, he's threatening the iranians. we're going to be in iraq 100 years. if we're in iraq 100 years, joe, we'll be fighting 100 years of war, just as the british, if they stayed in our country 100 years, would be fighting the americans for a century. i'm telling you, what john mccain's promising you.

- Pat Buchanan

BENNETT: Do you think there’s any chance that, and we won’t ask you to reveal anything confidential, do you think there’s any chance that we might take some action against some aspect of the Ira…against Iran, let’s put it that way, before the president leaves office?

KRISTOL: We didn’t really talk about that, in all honesty, directly. I don’t think it’s out of the question. I think people are overdoing how much of a lame duck the president is.

Appearing on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show last night, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) said that he wished the Bush administration would tell the Iranians that “unless they stop it, we’re going to take action.” “I’m not talking about all out war,” added Lieberman before saying, “they ought to believe that we’re going to hit those training camps.”

Lieberman has previously said that “we have to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians” while Kristol once believed that President Bush “could easily build political support” for strikes against Iran.

Transcript:

BENNETT: Here’s another conclusion I drew, I hadn’t heard this. I think Pat Buchanan might have drawn it. Maybe Pat and I would like your view of it. If you listen closely to this thing and you see where the trouble is now, the whole thing seems to me less an argument for getting out of Iraq than going into Iran, ah there increased role, right or wrong?

KRISTOL: Well, it is striking how much Petraeus and Crocker — again they have no agenda on this, they are reporting what they see on the ground — ah, how much Iran is behind the trouble making in the south and behind the Shia extremist groups, now that we’ve pretty much rolled up al Qaeda, except for some work that still has to be done up north. The Iranian backing of the Shia becomes the main, the Shia extremists, Sadr, becomes sort of the main obstacle to really, you know, having a successful resolution in Iraq, and so, I think just beginning from a very practical point of view, they are concerned about Iran and Crocker said, he’s talked to Iran. It’s not like we’re not talking to Iran. We’ve tried the Barack Obama method there. I think Crocker said two or three meetings with the Iranians in Baghdad and they have an interest in destabilizing Iraq, it’s that simple. And I think they only way they won’t is if they’re pushed back as we’ve done a little bit, as the Iraqi government has done in Iraq and then maybe, if they have to pay some price at some point on their own soil.

BENNETT: Do you think there’s any chance that, and we won’t ask you to reveal anything confidential, do you think there’s any chance that we might take some action against some aspect of the Ira…against Iran, let’s put it that way, before the president leaves office?

KRISTOL: We didn’t really talk about that, in all honesty, directly. I don’t think it’s out of the question. I think people are overdoing how much of a lame duck the president is. I think he thinks he needs to leave things in as good shape as he can for his successor. I don’t think he’s going to do something rash, I don’t think he’s got the attitude of, “I’ve got to do it because my successor won’t.” I think he wants to try to assume that his successor will have our interests at heart, will take a cold serious look at those when he takes over, and therefore he wants to leave things as good shape as possible. That’s one reason I think he’s very concerned not to try to drawdown to fast in Iraq. Whether that will lead him to do something in Iran or atleast or maybe leave it to his successor, I don’t know.

[…]

HEWITT: Now Senator, we’re rapidly getting back to where we were in, say, 1969, ’70 and ’71, where an enemy operating from a sanctuary does whatever they want to kill Americans, and we don’t do anything about it. What’s your advice to this administration about how to deter Iran from this continued killing, as you said, of hundreds of Americans?

LIEBERMAN: Yeah, you can’t deter these people…you know, some people say sit down and talk to them. I mean, Senator Obama has said if he’s elected president, he’d sit down and talk with Ahmadinejad without preconditions. But that will be taken as such a sign of weakness, that they will just increase their attacks against us. Honestly, I wish that this administration would specifically and clearly warn the Iranians that we know that they’re continuing to train terrorists who are killing American soldiers, we know that they’re bringing large caches of arms into Iraq, and unless they stop it, we’re going to take action. And you know, I’m not talking about all out war. We know, and I’m not revealing anything here, Hugh, the American military spokespeople in Iraq have said this over and over again publicly. We know that there are three training camps in Iran where they’re training the Iraqis who go back and kill our men and women in uniform. And if they don’t cut it out, they ought to believe that we’re going to hit those training camps. That, to me, is an act of self defense.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/10/lieberman-bennett-kristol-iran/

LOU DOBBS: Let’s begin with the issue of — the administration has stated categorically, you know, our generals have stated categorically that as many of the third of the deaths last month, for example, were caused by Iranian support of the insurgency and the provision of those shaped charges killing so many of our troops.

Why is there no reaction by this government and this military?

JAMES WOOLSEY: I don’t know. The Persians invented chess and the Iranians are doing a pretty good job of moving their pieces — Muqtada al-Sadr and those explosive devices, and Hamas and Hezbollah around to protect their queen, which is their most lethal piece — their nuclear weapons program.

And I suppose the administration is focused on that. But the way it’s chosen to work on is to, for years, turn it over to the Europeans, who have been stalled by the Iranians and the Iranians continue to work on getting enriched uranium.

I’m afraid within, well, at worst, a few months; at best, a few years; they could have a bomb.

A sponsor of both Hamas and Hezbollah, the leadership of Iran has repeatedly used violence to undermine Israel and the Middle East peace process. It has trained, financed, and equipped extremists in Iraq who have killed American soldiers fighting to bring freedom to that country. It remains the world's chief sponsor of terrorism and threatens to destabilize the entire Middle East, from Basra to Beirut.

Tehran's continued pursuit of nuclear weapons poses an unacceptable risk, a danger we cannot allow.

John McCain
June 02, 2008
AIPAC

Embracing a similar stance, Gary Schmitt, resident scholar and director of AEI’s Program of Advanced Strategic Studies, expressed concern with the Administration’s rhetoric for a “grand bargain” in which Iran would suspend its uranium enrichment and nuclear development in exchange for U.S. security guarantees.

“Nothing put on paper will convince Tehran of a friendly Washington,” explained Schmitt.

http://www.niacouncil.org/index.php?
option=com_co
ntent&task=view&id=416&Itemid=2

Presidential candidate John McCain shocked observers on Sunday when he told a crowd of supporters, "There's going to be other wars. ... I'm sorry to tell you, there's going to be other wars. We will never surrender but there will be other wars.'

If McCain gets in Iran's CERTAINLY going to get hit

Then, yesterday Obama says Iran is a grave ... a real... threat and he (Obama) will eliminate that threat.

They--ALL OF THEM--will say ANYTHING to get nominated and elected. If their mouths move and words come out, they are lying

nothing you've listed proves the "CERTAINTY" that McCain would take us to war with Iran-

Open your eyes and watch what the man is doing. Obama has taken one stand to get the Dem. Nom. and now is doing the opposite. Proof is in the pudding and the pudding is ready and being served up to all of us now.

Work within the system, not against it and change is possible........Obama is trying to work outside it.

Work within the system, not against it and change is possible........Obama is trying to work outside it.