Foreign policy. (interstate, thought, president, borders)

[NewToCA]

President's position on Iran:

We know that they're still trying to learn how to enrich uranium. We know that enriching uranium is an important step in a country who wants to develop a weapon. We know they had a program. We know the program is halted.

I think it is very important for the international community to recognize the fact that if Iran were to develop the knowledge that they could transfer to a clandestine program it would create a danger for the world. And so I view this report as a warning signal that they had the program, they halted the program. And the reason why it's a warning signal is that they could restart it. And the thing that would make a restarted program effective and dangerous is the ability to enrich uranium, the knowledge of which could be passed on to a hidden program.

Press Conference by the President

[burdell]

Originally Posted by TnHilltopper

What is also chilling is that Bush doesn't believe our own National Intelligence Estimate in regards to Iran.

“He told the Israelis that he can’t control what the intelligence community says, but that [the NIE’s] conclusions don’t reflect his own views”

Apparently the Israeli's are furious over the NIE report and Olmert referred to Americans as, "naive" in regards to the threat posed by Iran.

It's surely not surprising that anything to do with intelligence has nothing to do with Bush's own views.

[ck9]

as long as america continues to 33% of all tax revenue on " defense" things will never change, america needs an enemy or the economy would collapse. threr are to many people that proffit from these wars that have to much political influence.

[daveyjones]

This is Obama 's foreigh policy statements.
He is out of his mind with half of those.
Obama Doctrine: ideology has overridden facts and reality. (Dec 2007)
China is a competitor but not an enemy. (Dec 2007)
Willing to meet with Fidel Castro, Kim Jung Il & Hugo Chavez. (Nov 2007)
Invest in our relationship with Mexico. (Sep 2007)
Strengthen NATO to face 21st-century threats. (Aug 2007)
$50B annually to strengthen weak states at risk of collapse. (Aug 2007)
No "strategic ambiguity" on foreign policy issues. (Aug 2007)
My critics engineered our biggest foreign policy disaster. (Aug 2007)
China is a competitor, but not an enemy. (Aug 2007)
Meet with enemy leaders; it's a disgrace that we have not. (Jul 2007)
No-fly zone in Darfur; but pay attention more in Africa. (Jun 2007)
Europe & Japan are allies, but China is a competitor. (Apr 2007)
Palestinian people suffer-but from not recognizing Israel. (Apr 2007)
FactCheck: Palestinian suffering from stalled peace effort. (Apr 2007)
Protested South African apartheid while at college. (Feb 2007)
Focus on corruption to improve African development. (Oct 2006)
Supports Israel's self-defense; but distrusted by Israelis. (Oct 2006)
Visited Africa in 2006; encouraged HIV testing & research. (Oct 2006)
Never has US had so much power & so little influence to lead. (Jul 2004)
US policy should promote democracy and human rights. (Jul 2004)

[paperhouse]

Originally Posted by ck9

as long as america continues to 33% of all tax revenue on " defense" things will never change, america needs an enemy or the economy would collapse. threr are to many people that proffit from these wars that have to much political influence.

There are two ways to lose a war. You can stay on fighting and spending billions while the economy collapses back home. Or you can leave.

[Yeledaf]

Originally Posted by paperhouse

There are two ways to lose a war. You can stay on fighting and spending billions while the economy collapses back home. Or you can leave.

Or you can lose your own birth certificate and put your legal status in doubt.

Talk about an existential dilemma.

[vickilynn]

Originally Posted by Yeledaf

Or you can lose your own birth certificate and put your legal status in doubt.

Talk about an existential dilemma.

That's what asylum seekers were doing while I was living in the UK.

[Yeledaf]

Originally Posted by vickilynn

That's what asylum seekers were doing while I was living in the UK.

Sounds Kiplingesque.

[TnHilltopper]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

President's position on Iran:

We know that they're still trying to learn how to enrich uranium. We know that enriching uranium is an important step in a country who wants to develop a weapon. We know they had a program. We know the program is halted.

I think it is very important for the international community to recognize the fact that if Iran were to develop the knowledge that they could transfer to a clandestine program it would create a danger for the world. And so I view this report as a warning signal that they had the program, they halted the program. And the reason why it's a warning signal is that they could restart it. And the thing that would make a restarted program effective and dangerous is the ability to enrich uranium, the knowledge of which could be passed on to a hidden program.

This is the Bush foreign policy in a nut shell, should, could, maybe, IF, would, and all of it "hidden" and secret and undetectable. Lack of evidence is proof of guilt. We now use "desire" as guilt.

NTC, My problem with Bush's position, which is that of Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Norman Poderhertz, you know the schpeel here, is the premise of threat based in lack of evidence. Not that there is no threat because there is, but lack of proof to support a level of engagement out of measure with the level of threat. (extreme disproportion)

Like the "Plan B crowd"(wolfowitz and Perle) who said the Soviets had submarine technology that was so advanced we could not detect it and because we had no evidence (since we could not detect them) that it was in fact evidence. Twisted logic, you betcha.

Again in the lead up to Iraq as I am sure you are well aware of the song and dance that we all collectively bought into. Aluminum tubes for making nukes, well, not quite. 400 tonnes of VX nerve gas in and around Tikrit, well... not exactly. Niger yellow cake to go with tea and crumpets, well... not exactly. Chemical weapons trailers, well, not exactly... unless you are Krusty the clown and need to blow up a few balloons for a Kennedy party in Mass.

Again, the lack of physical evidence they claimed was in fact sufficient evidence because it was so secret, so sinister that we could not detect it so thus justified our invasion and subsequent occupation.

This brand of twisted logic is getting to be a pattern and one can only cry "maybe, IF, could be, might, some people say, one day, etc..." for so long then people no longer believe it. These people already spent all their currency of credibility and are now merely going deeper into debt.

On another thread I posted a bit on CSPAN airing a conference from the Council of Foreign Relations and during that conference there were some more level minded reality based Israeli's that were worried that this approach we are taking with Iran would damage long term relations. I was not aware that there are factions within the Israeli government that have had close ties to Iran over the past 50 or so years. I suspect this may be due to the substantial Jewish population in Iran, but in any case, it was framed that a hawkish but vocal minority in Israel and the United States were pushing for confrontation with Iran really hard.

As you pointed out in the thread about Chavez, in a year he will no longer be relevant, and in this case I can say the same for Bush. Between now and then however, I suspect that the straights of Hormuz and surrounding area will be one to watch with great intensity.

Originally Posted by burdell

It's surely not surprising that anything to do with intelligence has nothing to do with Bush's own views.

Not surprising at all. Bush does not need intelligence, he has faith based ideology, one based in a reality that he will create (his own words), and one that we will all read about in the days to come to study and later understand. If this is not one koolaid drinking nut case, I don't know what is.

[jdiddy]

We spend more on our military than every other country in the world, combined. Thus, the need to stay in Iraq and support the permanent military bases, to justify the need for our grossly inflated "defense" budget.