Ralph Nader: The Imperial Presidency

[marmar]

from CommonDreams:



Published on Tuesday, October 23, 2007 by CommonDreams.org
The Imperial Presidency
by Ralph Nader


Mired in the disastrous Iraq quagmire, opposed by a majority of Americans, George W. Bush has reached new depths of reckless, belligerent bellowing. At a recent news conference, he volunteered that he told our allies that if they’re “interested in avoiding World War III,” Iran must be prevented from both developing a nuclear weapon or having “the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon.”

To what level of political insanity has this Washington Caesar descended? Only two countries can start World War III-Russia and the United States. Is Bush saying that if Russia, presently opposed to military action against Iran, persists with its position, Bush may risk World War III? If not, why is this law-breaking warmonger, looking for another war for American GIs to fight, while his military-age daughters bask in the celebrity lime light?

Why is he using such catastrophic language?

Surely he does not think Iran could start World War III. His own intelligence agencies say that, even assuming that the international inspectors are wrong and Iran is moving toward developing the “knowledge” of such weapons, it can’t build its first such weapon before 3 to 5 years at the earliest.

Why would a regime ruling an impoverished country risk suicide, surrounded as it is by countries armed to the nuclear teeth, such as Israel and the United States? This nation of nearly 80 million people hardly needs to be reminded that the U.S. overthrew its popular premier in 1953, installing for the next 27 years the brutal regime of the Shah.

They recall that President Reagan and his Vice President, George Herbert Walker Bush urged, funded and equipped Saddam Hussein in his invasion of Iran-a nation that has not invaded any country in over 250 years-which took around 700,000 Iranian lives.

Moreover, the undeniable historical record shows that U.S. companies received licenses from the Department of Commerce, under Reagan, to ship Saddam the raw materials necessary to make chemical and biological weapons. Saddam used such lethal chemical weapons, with the tolerance of Reagan and Rumsfeld, on Iranians to devastating effect in terms of lives lost. .....(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/10/23/4758/

[LoZoccolo]

1. Surely Gore would have done the same thing. n/t

[onehandle]

2. Thanks Ralph! Thanks for spending weeks in Florida in 2000.

Now go away.

[MH1]

3. You should post the part where he acknowledges that there's a difference between the parties.

Or isn't there such a part?

I'm not going to click on any link to a Nader article unless it's going to show he's admitted his mistake.

[Buzz Clik]

4. Remind me -- what is the difference between the parties?

Exactly what new and wonderful things has the Democratically controlled Congress accomplished? Oh, yeah -- they keep passing Bush's agenda items.

The problem is not Nader.

[MH1]

5. You're saying Al Gore would have invaded Iraq?

Left New Orleans to drown while he ate cake?

Gutted environmental protections?

Gutted the Constitution?

Get real.

[Buzz Clik]

6. Your comment was clearly about the comparison of the parties, not Bush/Gore.

Are you revising your statement now? We're no longer comparing the parties in general?

[MH1]

7. Gore was the nominee of the Democratic Party, Bush the nominee of the Republican Party.

I am not revising my statement - it was Nader who said - IN REFERENCE TO THE 2000 ELECTION - that there was "not a dime's worth of difference" between the two.

Has Nader revised HIS statement? That is my question.