Lieberman, Bennett, And Kristol See Petraeus Hearing As ‘An Argument’ For ‘Going Into Iran’

[marmar]

from ThinkProgress:



Lieberman, Bennett, And Kristol See Petraeus Hearing As ‘An Argument’ For ‘Going Into Iran’»

During their appearance before the Senate on Tuesday, Gen. David Petraeus and Amb. Ryan Crocker accused Iran of “funding, training, arming and directing extremist ’special groups’ in Iraq.” “I think one might look for a reconsideration in Tehran as to just where they want to go in Iraq,” said Crocker. “This would be an excellent time for them to reassess.”

Liveblogging the hearings for the Washington Post, Fiasco author Thomas Ricks pondered what Crocker could have intended with his “reassess” comment, considering that “there will be a new American president in place in less than a year“:

But he also said, “This would be an excellent time for them to reassess.” What does he mean by that? Why would Iran want to adjust their relationship now, when there will be a new American president in place in less than a year? Or is there some sort of implied threat there: You guys better get smart, or this president still has time to pound you?

It is unclear whether such a veiled threat was Crocker’s intention, but some on the right are certainly seeing his and Petraeus’s testimony as cause to begin talking about striking Iran again.

On his radio show this morning, Bill Bennett told the Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol — who had a personal meeting with President Bush yesterday — that a “conclusion” he drew was that the hearing was “less an argument for getting out of Iraq than going into Iran.” After suggesting that Iran may “have to pay some price at some point on their own soil,” Kristol said that President Bush authorizing an attack of some kind before he leaves office is not “out of the question”:

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.”

Listen to Bennett, Kristol, and Lieberman here: http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/10/lieberman-bennett-kristol-iran/


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. ......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/10/lieberman-bennett-kristol-iran/

[stellanoir]

1. assholes

That would be even more suicidal and destructive than their ill fated invasion and occupation of Iraq.

[kentuck]

2. Then, what happens??

Does Iran immediately surrender? Do we get bogged down in another war we cannot afford and do not have the military to fight? Do we just declare the nation is in bankruptcy and give up? We know how much thought they put into the invasion of Iraq. It appears they are going to repeat that blunder? If they do, what should the Congress do? Impeach Bush and Cheney or turn them over to the World Court as war criminals?

[jimshoes]

3. the 3 Mosquitos

All for one and one for all as long as we don't have to pay for it.

[nealmhughes]

4. Joe Howard, Bill Fine, and Bill Howard. Comedic geniuses.

Oh wait, that is Liebraman, Kristol and Bennett. . . nevermind.

[SalmonChantedEvening]

5. JoeJoe and the Dog-faced boys of war.

The drums you three fools are beating will not strike any chords, save those of rejection.

[spanone]

6. we can't get these criminals out of office quick enough

[ljm2002]

7. Remarkable, isn't it...

...but not surprising.

After all, with this crew, ANYTHING at all or NOTHING at all would be interpreted as an argument for going into Iran.

It's like the dynamics in an abusive relationship: nothing that the abused person does or does not do makes a difference. The abuser just needs to abuse. In this case, these warmongers just need to get their war on.

Here we are in the 6th year of a brutal occupation in Iraq, having ignored our responsibilities in Afghanistan and pretended that Pakistan is just A-Okay, and we still have "officials" telling us with a straight face how much "better" things are in Iraq.

Even if things are "better" than they were a year ago (a dubious proposition), are they better than they were before we invaded? I'm guessing that the hundreds of thousands of dead and their families and friends, as well as the MILLIONS of displaced Iraqis, would not think so.

If I were a religious person my faith would be sorely tested right about now. When, oh Lord, can we expect some JUSTICE to be meted out to these murderous war criminals?