Bolton: We Should Carry Out Regime Change In Iran Because ‘It Did Work In Iraq’

[babylonsister]

:argh: :argh:

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/01/bolton-iraq-iran/

Bolton: We Should Carry Out Regime Change In Iran Because ‘It Did Work In Iraq’

The Jerusalem Post reported yesterday that former U.N. ambassador John Bolton advised Tory delegates in Britain this weekend that they should press for “pre-emptive strike on suspected nuclear facilities” in Iran.

“Because life is about choices, I think we have to consider the use of military force,” Bolton said. He added that any strike “should be followed by an attempt to remove” the “source of the problem,” Iranian President Ahmadinejad.

Fleshing out his hawkish dreams on British television, Bolton suggested that the U.S. overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq was a model for the “policy of regime change” he would like to see done in Iran:

Q: It’s not of the course the policy that worked in Iraq though, did it? I mean, that was the policy of regime change.

BOLTON: No, but I think it did work in Iraq. … Knowing everything we know today, I think it’s unquestionably the case that we were right to overthrow Saddam. We achieved our strategic objective. I think the world is better off for it.

I don’t think you should conflate what happened in the post-Saddam period. And whatever happened and however bad it’s been, doesn’t change the fundamental analytical point that we’re better off without Saddam.

Watch it at link~

There is no “strategic objective” that has been gained through the Iraq war. Rather, it has fueled the spread of terrorism, overstretched our ground forces, caused the unnecessary death of thousands of soldiers and Iraqi civilians, and fundamentally made the world a more dangerous place for the United States.

A military conflict in Iraq is likely to produce the same effects as the Iraq war. Moreover, a military attack on Iran “would not, as is often said, delay the Iranian program. It would almost certainly speed it up.”

Bolton’s unquenchable appetite for war is easy to espouse given that he seems to care little about the disastrous consequences that follow.

[liberal N proud]

1. It worked in Iraq?

Is that why there is a sectarian civil war ongoing for 4 years after we invaded and occupy the land?
:nuke:

[RaleighNCDUer]

16. To hell with the civil war --

thousands of terrorists are now getting OJT in Iraq, and while Saddam was in power the only terrorists in his country were the American-backed anti-Iranian Kurds, in the part of Iraq Saddam DIDN'T control.

Millions of Iraqis now have good reason to hate us. THAT makes us safer?

[Cha]

2. Regime Change begins

at home, scumbreath.

[beberocks]

3. Bolton must smoke crack

Because he is delusional, crazy, and too stupid for words. The people that brought you such a "success" in Iraq are now planning for the second coming with Iran/Russia.

[no_hypocrisy]

4. Hey, John! Charity starts at home.

We'll discuss Iran after we talk about the squatter in the WH since 2001.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

5. And what, exactly...

...was the strategic objective we achieved there?

[Robbien]

6. It did work in his opinion because there is no longer a viable Muslim state

One less for the GOP warmongers to worry about. Now there is just a bunch of Iraqi Arabs going around killing each other. A good result in Bolton's viewpoint.

[geckosfeet]

7. Regime change? How about good old fashioned lynching by proxy.

Asshole.

[Disturbed]

9. "We achieved our strategic objective."

He admits that it was about Regime change, which is Illegal under Intl. Law. The WMDs was a lie but that is now ancient history & nothing can or will be done about it.

What is his job now?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

15. I do not think it is so clear cut.

A lot of the hardcore neoconservative lunatics still buy the idea that saddam was going to get nukes and use them on us. Hell, some of them still seriously think he was behind the 1993 world trade center bombing. I suppose that if your view of the world is that warped, maybe this does make sense as a "strategic objective." But quite frankly you'd have to be a fucking retard to actually believe that shit.

[SOS]

17. The "Clean Break" PNAC policy paper outlined the objective:

"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions."

Pure fantasyland...but that's where the neocons live.

[Not_Giving_Up]

8. This needs to get out

I sent it to Countdown....maybe Keith will mention this tonight. After all, this is the one that made the media...How many others are lobbying other countries for the same action??

[Tempest]

10. Here's proof Bolton is clueless about Iran

He added that any strike “should be followed by an attempt to remove” the “source of the problem,” Iranian President Ahmadinejad.

Ahmadinejad is just a figurehead.

The Ayatollahs are the real power in Iran.

[The_Casual_Observer]

11. It's a little soon for that verdict no matter how loud today's government

orchestrated pr barrage is.

[Adsos Letter]

12. So THAT'S what it looks like when something "works"...

...all these years attempting to become successful, and I've simply been looking at the wrong business model....

[Swamp Rat]

13. The rantings of the raving lunatic John "Nuke 'Em All" Bolton.

He belongs in a padded cell forever.

[Rob H.]

14. "Knowing everything we know today..."

:wtf: Is he high?! He and Richard Perle need to go set up their own little neocon "we'll defend our huge mistake 'til the day we die" love nest and leave the rest of us alone!

[clarence swinney]

18. SWOOSH AMERICA IS DUST

The Bolton's create fear and destruction.
SWOOSH-

Osama Bib Laden said on one of first videotapes-“I have had nightmares for years on watching Tall Buildings Fall in Beirut from shelling by Americans. I have dreamed of watching Tall Buildings fall in America.

ONE MAN”S REVENGE only

It is reported (2-1-07)that we plan a Radar Tracking Station near Prague and Missiles in Poland
Remember Cuban missile crisis?
SPIN=IRAN = pure moogumboo
The Pentagon has admitted we cannot destroy Russian missiles in flight due to low heat emission engines and advanced decoys.
The solution is on LAUNCH---from nearby sites
Investors Business Daily reported in USA Today Opiniononline on 2-2-07 “Russia this week said it hoped to have Iran’s Bushehre nuclear (energy)* plant up and running by September; in violation of UN Sanctions. *Authors note.

"Armageddon could occur if we attack Iran."

Senator McCain said that on TV 4-2-06.

I have been saying it for a year.

Gorbachev said last week--"America is intoxicated with it’s power"
Putin said-“America has become an Imperialist Arrogant nation”.
Top Two Russian military leaders said last year--"Do not bomb Iran".

USA Today 7-17-07-‘US warned to stay out of Central Asia.The leaders of Russia, China, Iran said it at the end of a summit attended by Putin, Chinese President Jintao, and the leaders of four former Soviet Central Asian nations. Iran, India, Pakistan and Mongolia are observer members of the group formed to counter US influence in the region.

This is Serious Talk.

Sept. 18 (Bloomberg) -- A U.S. military strike on Iran would have ``catastrophic consequences,'' Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Losyukov said.
``Bomb attacks on Iran would be a wrong move leading to catastrophic consequences,'' Losyukov said in an interview with newspaper Vremya Novostei, published on the ministry's Web site.

Losyukov's remarks come two days after French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said the world should ``prepare for the worst'' in the crisis over Iran's nuclear program, and that ``the worst is war.'' In Moscow today, Kouchner said everything must be done to avoid war and called for all sides to ``negotiate, negotiate, negotiate without a break.''
-------------------------
Russian President Vladimir Putin is due in Tehran on Oct. 16 for a meeting of leaders of the countries bordering the Caspian Sea, and Losyukov was asked if Putin might be in danger from U.S. attacks if he attends. ``I think they will refrain before the summit, otherwise they'll have very serious problems,'' he replied.
9-19-07
It is serious time folks.


It will take 90 minutes (authors guess) for America to disappear.

200 ICBM=2,000 very powerful nuclear warheads=40 per state.

Seven stories underground-- one of many silos

Secretary of Defense William Perry visited the Silo. “Aghast!”

Target is America

Each ICBM loaded with multiple Nuclear Warheads.*

*(Correction—4-20-06)—“this is incorrect.”
Each ICBM has only one Nuke.
Bush-Yeltsin agreement in 1999 agreed on only one whereas before there were ten.
Verification is extensive. Not foolproof.
Our Air Force Experts visit their Silos frequently as they also visit ours.
All Nuclear Warhead Loaded ICBM are directed to fall in an ocean to prevent a mistake creating a war.

Nonetheless, 200 Nukes can destroy America.

How fast can they load 200 ICBM with 10 warheads on each?

How fast can they insert the Disk to target USA?

Pentagon says do not worry. We inspect. Yes! We have Air Force Inspectors at their silos as they have at ours.

Same type who said Pearl Harbor attack was impossible.

Russian First Deputy Minister of Defense stated 5-30-07-We have tested an ICBM that hit a target 3400 miles away. It can penetrate any missile defense system. It was fired from a mobile launcher.

Much of the World is very, very angry with America's current leadership.