WHY DOES HILLARY SAY IRAN IS TRYING TO GET NUCLEAR WEAPONS?

[LSK]

SHE JUST SAID IT ON COUNTDOWN!!

DID SHE NOT FUCKING READ THE NIE (AGAIN!!!)???? WHY IS SHE CHANNELING DICK CHENEY AND GEORGE BUSH????

:grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr:

[ingac70]

1. Because she is a lying, warmongering....

whore.

[polpilot]

28. ...Pro-War, Pro-NAFTA, Pro-McCain closet repub!

[bigtree]

Obama must be a warmonger, too, then

Obama before AIPAC: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/1,7340,L-3371763,00.html


“The world must work to stop Iran's uranium enrichment program and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. It is far too dangerous to have nuclear weapons in the hands of a radical theocracy,” he said.

Even though all options were on the table, Obama said the utmost efforts should be devoted to “sustained and aggressive diplomacy combined with tough sanctions”.

Obama stressed the importance of preventing Iran’s nuclear armament, which could lead weapons of mass destruction into the hands of terrorists, inevitably causing other Middle East nations to join the race for nuclear weapons. “

[Tim4319]

A Repub in Dem clothing!

[SoonerPride]

2. FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR ( REPEAT)

FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR FEAR TERRA FEAR TERRA FEAR FEAR

[whistle]

3. It is no longer necessary to just drink the reTHUGlicon kool-aid, it has become toxic

...just to have it splashed on you!

[LakeSamish706]

4. Because both George and Dick told her that... She is in lock step with the current...

Administration and I don't understand why the Hillary supporters don't realize this. This woman is very bad news as far as becoming the next President.

[newmajority]

5. She didn't read the NIE. Instead she read the AIPAC talking points.

And it is fucking sickening that she is on nationwide TV LYING her warmongering ass off about it.

[bunnies]

6. Because shes insane.

And she wants to prove that girls can ignore intelligence and start wars too.

Obviously shes following the Bush model. You know... Kerry and Gore were both too Elitist. Bush could identify with the peeps. She can too! yay?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

7. Rachel Maddow summed it up perfectly.

There's a theory out there that democrats have to be even more hawkish then republicans in order to get elected.

This is, of course, and incredibly stupid and insulting theory, but then again this is Hillary Clinton we're talking about.

[sniffa]

8. Because she'll say or do anything

to obliterate Iran.

[Thepricebreaker]

9. Oh come on!! They have admited it many times....

[Rick Myers]

10. Elitist!?!?!?!

She really going down in flames!!!

[Diamond Dog]

11. BE AFRAID!

FEAR
FEAR
FEAR
FEAR
FEAR
FEAR
FEAR

[DJ13]

12. It sounds like she's getting advice from Lieberman

[blm]

13. In 2006, Kerry said that Iran was 5 years away from even the CAPABILITY of having nuclear weapons

according to all the intel they had seen. I posted at DU a recap of the summer event in Columbia, SC, at the time.

He said that gives us 5 years to engage in diplomacy to avoid use of force.

He said at that speech in summer of 2006 that the WH would tell us Iran is a threat so they can avoid diplomatic measures but we shouldn't believe them. He PREDICTED their lie then.

Now it is Hillary carrying Bush's Iran water for him.

[H2O Man]

14. It's really troubling.

People who should know better are talking about the "risks" of Iran attacking one of its neighbors with nuclear weapons. It might be worth looking at Iran's history.

[LSK]

16. Iran has not attacked another country for over 200 years

This is so maddening.

:grr:

[H2O Man]

26. I have often

recommended that people who are interested in accessing the "risks" of an Iranian attack read "The Persian Puzzle: The Conflict Between Iran and America," by Kenneth Pollack. He is, of course, a conservative voice. He was certainly prone to viewing Iraq as a bigger problem than it would have been, had we not allowed the Bush-Cheney war of occupation to begin, in his "The Threatening Storm."

His book shows that Iran is not a aggressive country if we judge by its actual history, as opposed to the fear-mongering of the neoconservatives. The PNAC group does not want to allow for any "regional power" -- and the Iraqi war has helped make Iran a larger regional power than they could have been otherwise.

The neoconservatives are determined to re-draw the map of the Middle East. We need a president who does not share their delusions.

[dcindian]

15. Hillary loves war....

You can tell by the way she steals the real valor of the fighting men and women of this country. Just like any Republican war monger giggling at the war footage on you tube then telling the story like they were there. Hillary's sniper story tells a much deeper tale of war-mongery then the Hillary loving media will let on.

[LakeSamish706]

17. I gotta say, I have as much problem leaving my TV on when she comes on as I do...

when George W Bush is on.... She just hits a crap nerve in me that makes me want to go ballistic.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

18. Because she is a warmonger and wants to continue the Imperial Presidency. Didn't you know?

[onehandle]

19. Uh... Because they say they are?

She's just politicizing that Fact. I'm not happy that she is, but you can't say it's not true.

On edit: They did have a program and now claim that they do not have an active program.

[Diamond Dog]

20. Go read the NIE, pronto.

They aren't, and haven't.

[onehandle]

24. They did and stopped in 2003.

However the NIE says that they could start it up at any time and produce nuke in a few years.

The are close, but claim that they have suspended their program. However, as their plant technology improves, the timeframe it would take them to make nukes shortens.

[LSK]

27. close???? they can barely enrich !!!

:wtf:

[onehandle]

29. Read the NIE.

North Korea can barely feed itself and they have nukes.

This is my last response. I'm not supporting Hillary's stupid premise.

[LSK]

23. not according to the IAEA or the NIE from all our intellegence agencies

What information do you have?

http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/20071203_release.pdf

[Occam Bandage]

34. They don't. And it's not "they claim they do not have..." The latest NIE claims they do not have.

That would be the latest intelligence survey put out by our government.

[tekisui]

21. And, "Iran is the greatest threat!"

Whatever. She wants more war. Period.

[slipslidingaway]

31. John Edwards said the same thing...

"Iran is the greatest threat!"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x33663

[Bonobo]

22. Because of Sexism I'm pretty sure.

[HooptieWagon]

38. !

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

I think that's a DUzy...

[mrJJ]

25. Israel can Nuke its own enemies

Israel is purported to have at least 50 nukes in its arsenal...They can take care of themselves.

[bowens43]

30. She's become a neo-con nutcase seeking the republican vote.

She knows that democrats will never elect her after what she has done

[bonito]

32. Ever since the NH Primaries Clinton/ McCain victory

The Lieberman pro war wet dream ticket, I knew the fix was in.

[Aloha Spirit]

33. Dick Holbrooke is brainwashing her.

[Occam Bandage]

35. Because she's fucking insane.

[Andy823]

36. It's the George Bush

Fear and smear tactic! She thinks she can scare people into voting for her. Guess since it worked for Bush, she figures it could work for her! Problem is democrats are smarter that republicans, and only a few will buy into her BS!

[scheming daemons]

37. Because she is a REPUBLICAN who is pretending to be a Democrat.....

Once a Goldwater Girl, always a Goldwater Girl...

[Avalux]

39. She sounded just like them didn't she? Thinks she can bomb anyone she wants.

What the hell? x(

[PetraPooh]

40. Because she is a closet Bushbot?

[Diamond Dog]

41. To reiterate something I said in another thread - attn. all progressives.

The MoveOn fiasco shows how little the neo-liberal princess thinks of the progressive Democratic base. We must not make the mistake of defending a potential Clinton candidacy. As soon as she makes a move to go to war with Iran, we must be prepared to wage war against her at all cost.

Remember what we did to Johnson in the 60's. He was a Democrat. So is she. Neither were progressive.

Do not contribute to her. Do not campaign for her. Vote for her, and that's it.

And the first time she rattles the proverbial saber (or Sabot), drop your shit, pick up a placard, and march.

[NJSecularist]

46. LBJ wasn't a progressive?

I beg to differ. He's the most liberal president in the last 50 years.

[EFerrari]

47. And he was no progressive. That's how far the party has swung to the right. n/t

[NJSecularist]

49. What is your definition of a progressive?

By any definition, LBJ was a progressive. He was more liberal than Carter and Clinton.

[EFerrari]

52. So was Nixon. lol

LBJ was a Democrat and a damn fine one but his idea of social justice belongs to the white privileged male of that time.

Maybe it's just a mistake to try to see that president through this anachronistic lens.

[NJSecularist]

55. Could you be more specific?

The Great Society program and his War on Poverty were two pillars of his administration, both of which were dedicated to fighting for social justice.

He was a very big progressive relative to his time period, and even now you could consider him a progressive.

It's absurd to compare Nixon to LBJ.

[EFerrari]

58. I was comparing Nixon to Carter and Clinton, in fact.

Johnson was a notorious racist and gynophobe, for one thing. If you use that axis alone, you can't really label him progressive by contemporary standards.

He was in the mainstream in his day and he was very good at getting his programs made into law. But, he was also of his day.

[Diamond Dog]

53. Circumstances forced his hand. He was no fan of desegregation himself.

"I have lost the South for a generation" and all that.

[NJSecularist]

57. How does that statement indicate he was no fan of desegregation?

He was simply making an observation, a true one at that.

[EFerrari]

60. Well, there was that whole FBI surveillance on Dr. King thing.

That was the Johnson Administration, no?

[Diamond Dog]

61. And the Gulf of Tonkin 'Incident'.

A blatant lie to the public if ever there was one, and fundamentally antidemocratic.

[EFerrari]

62. LBJ got so much done during his tenure. He deserves all the credit

in the world. He was also a bastard and at times, a control freak and a liar.

But he was no progressive. And, it may be the best measure of what happened to the party after they shot Bobby and after McGovern was left hanging in the wind, that Nixon WAS more progressive than our last two Democratic presidents.

If we could build to the place where LBJ's programs were possible again, that would be an achievement.

[Beaverhausen]

42. She didn't say they would have them next week or next year

She said they want to get a nuclear program going. I thought her answer was great - especially the part about facing the national security questions in the GE - don't think the repukes won't bring up Iran.

[jazzjunkysue]

43. 2 words: Joe Lieberman. She's one of them.

She's McCain in pantyhose.

[UndertheOcean]

44. She pandering to Israel and AIPAC

disgusting

[slipslidingaway]

45. But Obama has said the same thing, see the video below.

Obama on Iran...

“They are in the process of obtaining nuclear weapons. I don’t think that is disputed by any expert.”


Video
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/26/democratic-candidate-debate-obama-kucinich-and-gravel-talk-iran/


I remember this because I supported Kucinich who interrupted to say that it is disputed.

[EFerrari]

48. I don't like either of these candidates' foreign policy positions.

Obama is a little less overtly neo liberal but only by a hair.

(I miss Dennis and sanity.)

[slipslidingaway]

56. Same here, the best we can do at this point is to try and let them

know that we know and no get caught up in the petty BS.

:)

[Cali_Democrat]

68. He said that BEFORE the NIE on Iran

[slipslidingaway]

78. So then that begs the question as to what intelligence led him

to make this remark in April 2007?

“They are in the process of obtaining nuclear weapons. I don’t think that is disputed by any expert.”

Was Kucinich correct in stating that the evidence was disputed, it appears that way to me.


Note the date...

Most U.S. tips fingering Iran false -- envoys
No intelligence given U.N. since '02 led to big discoveries
Bob Drogin, Kim Murphy, Los Angeles Times

Sunday, February 25, 2007

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/02/25/MNGGKOAR681.DTL&feed=rss.news

"(02-25) 04:00 PDT Vienna -- Despite growing international concern about Iran's nuclear program and its regional ambitions, most U.S. intelligence shared with the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency has proved inaccurate, and none has led to significant discoveries inside Iran, diplomats here said.

The officials said the CIA and other Western spy services have provided sensitive information to the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency at least since 2002, when Iran's long-secret nuclear program was exposed. But none of the tips about supposed secret weapons sites provided clear evidence that the Islamic republic is developing illicit weapons.

"Since 2002, pretty much all the intelligence that's come to us has proved to be wrong," said a senior diplomat at the atomic energy agency.

Another official described the agency's intelligence stream as "very cold now, (because) so little panned out."

...The CIA still faces harsh criticism for its prewar intelligence errors on Iraq. No one in Vienna argues that U.S. intelligence officials have fallen this time for crudely forged documents or have pushed shoddy analysis. Officials at the atomic energy agency, who openly challenged U.S. assessments that Iraq's Saddam Hussein was developing a nuclear bomb, say the Americans are much more cautious in assessing Iran.

U.S. officials privately acknowledge that much of their evidence on Iran's nuclear plans and programs remains ambiguous, fragmented and difficult to prove..."

[LSK]

76. thats was BEFORE the NIE came out n/t

[Barack_America]

50. Because Bill gets a lot of money from Sunnis....

In Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E.

:shrug:

[milkyway]

51. Hillary would make Bush seem like Gandhi. She's so worried about not seeming like a

"weak" female that she'll be a bigger warmonger than any repug. (not my characterization, but apparently what she thinks)

[depakid]

54. Why do you cap lock when a simple research deal could answer your questions

Enquiring minds would like to know why people act like this.

Seems to me- posts like this are just graffiti. Like we can see anywhere.

[bhikkhu]

59. She didn't read the NIE or the intelligence, same as IWR.

At the moment (having watched the KO interview) she appears to be either stupid or nuts on this point, as she has appeared all along on the Iraq war..

[slipslidingaway]

64. Obama on Iran...

Video

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/26/democratic-candidate-debate-obama-kucinich-and-gravel-talk-iran/

“They are in the process of obtaining nuclear weapons. I don’t think that is disputed by any expert.”


And I am not a Hillary supporter, but why single out Clinton when Obama says the same thing

[bhikkhu]

65. That is dated nearly a year ago.

Much has happened since, and we know a great deal more.

edit to say -prior to the recent NIE report, little real intelligence had been released and I was in as much doubt as anybody. Hillary spoke today, however, contradicting the best assessments now available (and essentially buddying up to Bush-pal Gates).

[slipslidingaway]

82. Yes I know the date, I also know that Kucinich said during the

debate that the information was disputed, Obama dismissed his remarks as you can see in the video.

Kucinich was correct in saying that the information was disputed at the time, he did not have to wait for the NIE to find that out, obviously there are other sources.

I certainly hope that we do not fall back on using the NIE as an excuse for not reading other sources.

See my reply here and the article from February 2007, a couple of months prior to the April debate.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5609309&mesg_id=5622519

[Cali_Democrat]

67. He said that BEFORE the NIE on Iran

[LSK]

77. do you read your replies??? do you know how to look at dates?

:shrug:

[slipslidingaway]

79. Yes and I also sleep and do other things as well, see my reply

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5609309&mesg_id=5622519


So then that begs the question as to what intelligence led him to make this remark in April 2007?

“They are in the process of obtaining nuclear weapons. I don’t think that is disputed by any expert.”

Was Kucinich correct in stating that the evidence was disputed, it appears that way to me.


Note the date...

Most U.S. tips fingering Iran false -- envoys
No intelligence given U.N. since '02 led to big discoveries
Bob Drogin, Kim Murphy, Los Angeles Times

Sunday, February 25, 2007

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/02/25/MNGGKOAR681.DTL&feed=rss.news

"(02-25) 04:00 PDT Vienna -- Despite growing international concern about Iran's nuclear program and its regional ambitions, most U.S. intelligence shared with the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency has proved inaccurate, and none has led to significant discoveries inside Iran, diplomats here said.

The officials said the CIA and other Western spy services have provided sensitive information to the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency at least since 2002, when Iran's long-secret nuclear program was exposed. But none of the tips about supposed secret weapons sites provided clear evidence that the Islamic republic is developing illicit weapons.

"Since 2002, pretty much all the intelligence that's come to us has proved to be wrong," said a senior diplomat at the atomic energy agency.

Another official described the agency's intelligence stream as "very cold now, (because) so little panned out."

...The CIA still faces harsh criticism for its prewar intelligence errors on Iraq. No one in Vienna argues that U.S. intelligence officials have fallen this time for crudely forged documents or have pushed shoddy analysis. Officials at the atomic energy agency, who openly challenged U.S. assessments that Iraq's Saddam Hussein was developing a nuclear bomb, say the Americans are much more cautious in assessing Iran.

U.S. officials privately acknowledge that much of their evidence on Iran's nuclear plans and programs remains ambiguous, fragmented and difficult to prove..."

[slipslidingaway]

84. There was information prior to the NIE that the intel was disputed,

at least Kucinich was reading and challenging the administration.

[depakid]

63. delete

[Cali_Democrat]

66. Hillary didn't learn from her vote for the Iraq War

History repeats itself yet again. Hillary clearly meets the definition of insanity.

[2rth2pwr]

69. Because they are.

[dailykoff]

70. I think she's trying to hotdog McCain out of his own primary.

Hell she's tried and failed to snake every Dem office in sight, why not go after his? :eyes:

[bridgit]

71. They got nukes, we got nukes; all God's chillin got nukes...

:nuke:

[intaglio]

72. Because - She believes Dubya and Condi and Dick

Just like she believed them about the IWR

[workinclasszero]

73. Because Hillary is a lyin neocon POS

IMHO.

She looking for an excuse to bomb Iran, just like King George did with Iraq. Hope all you 'democrats' enjoy President Hillary's draft LOL

[stevenleser]

74. She has sold her soul to the neocons, that's why.

Sorry to say there are two neocons in this race and one Democrat, Obama.

[invictus]

75. Hillary is a neo-con. There should be no doubt. If she won, there would be MORE war, not less. n/t

[uponit7771]

80. I don't think she reads much of anything, she scares me because she sounds like Bush

[noonwitch]

81. Because Iran is trying to get nuclear weapons

Duh.

[uponit7771]

83. There's no proof of that.