<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bush Talks Tough On Iran</title>
	<atom:link href="http://donklephant.com/2005/08/13/bush-talks-tough-on-iran/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/08/13/bush-talks-tough-on-iran/</link>
	<description>Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:03:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donklephant &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Chuck Hagel: &#8220;Let&#8217;s Talk To Iran&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/08/13/bush-talks-tough-on-iran/comment-page-1/#comment-1466</link>
		<dc:creator>Donklephant &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Chuck Hagel: &#8220;Let&#8217;s Talk To Iran&#8221;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Aug 2005 01:12:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=594#comment-1466</guid>
		<description>[...] And what does Hagel think about Bush&#8217;s tough talk on Iran &#8220;Quite frankly, what is the military option, what are we talking about here? We lose credibility in the face of the world when we say things like, &#8216;Well just don&#8217;t forget what happened to Iraq could happen to you Iran. We could invade you, we could bomb you.&#8217; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] And what does Hagel think about Bush&#8217;s tough talk on Iran &#8220;Quite frankly, what is the military option, what are we talking about here? We lose credibility in the face of the world when we say things like, &#8216;Well just don&#8217;t forget what happened to Iraq could happen to you Iran. We could invade you, we could bomb you.&#8217; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin Gardner</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/08/13/bush-talks-tough-on-iran/comment-page-1/#comment-1286</link>
		<dc:creator>Justin Gardner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Aug 2005 14:49:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=594#comment-1286</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;i&gt;Its not the time to be hand wringing now, its time to be strong and draw a line in the sand and going with it. Decide which ideology you subscribe to and defend it.

The West embraces long life. Iran glorifies death and they will bring it to us make no mistake about it. They just need the capability and they are not far away. Make your choice.

If we come through it all and out the other end, we can argue party politics in a peaceful and democratic way at a later date. Just pray that you get the opportunity.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Recent reports have put Iran&#039;s capability to make the materials necessary for a nuclear bomb out to about 10 years. Forgive me if I&#039;m taking your comments with a grain of salt. And yours are the same types of fear tactics I was sold before the war with Iraq, so again...grain of salt.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><i>Its not the time to be hand wringing now, its time to be strong and draw a line in the sand and going with it. Decide which ideology you subscribe to and defend it.</p>
<p>The West embraces long life. Iran glorifies death and they will bring it to us make no mistake about it. They just need the capability and they are not far away. Make your choice.</p>
<p>If we come through it all and out the other end, we can argue party politics in a peaceful and democratic way at a later date. Just pray that you get the opportunity.</i></p></blockquote>
<p>Recent reports have put Iran&#8217;s capability to make the materials necessary for a nuclear bomb out to about 10 years. Forgive me if I&#8217;m taking your comments with a grain of salt. And yours are the same types of fear tactics I was sold before the war with Iraq, so again&#8230;grain of salt.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: debsay</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/08/13/bush-talks-tough-on-iran/comment-page-1/#comment-1283</link>
		<dc:creator>debsay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Aug 2005 14:32:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=594#comment-1283</guid>
		<description>Jon,

&quot;Saddam Hussain had something the west wanted and that was oil and now we got it with a whole load of trouble to boot. Taking Iraq militarily was a fairly easy option and one that was simple to sell the public as Saddam was a bad man anyway, and I think behind-the-curtains, everybody knew there was no WMDÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s...&quot;

I keep hearing everybody say that &#039;we knew that there weren&#039;t any WMD&#039;s in Iraq&#039; yet they never cite anything that showed this before the invasion.  If you are using the information gained as a result of the invasion that wasn&#039;t available to us &#039;before&#039; the invasion so you are armchair quarterbacking... show me something that we had before the invasion that would prove that Iraq didn&#039;t have WMDs.  If there was even the possibility that he did, given his stance against the US, then we would have been remiss had we not gone in and checked.  Can you imagine the screamfest if Bush hadn&#039;t gone into Iraq and they did have WMDs that they gave to a terrorist to use in our country?  If that had happened then I would have been one of the ones calling for Bush&#039;s head.... why, because even after such a severe attack on the US Bush didn&#039;t take the terrorist threats seriously...  

&quot;Neuclear is diffferent and Iran will use it on Israel without batting an eyelid. This is the real deal now. I donÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢t think Bush should need to convince any of us that we need to stop them. Saddam was a gangster, and a brutal one at that and knew how to play the game. He has now had his hands slapped but its not IraqiÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s that are stirring all the trouble for our troops, its Iran who is at the centre of it all. The latest terrorist attacks on us all just sped up the process of dismantling it bit by bit.&quot;

I agree with this, I believe that Bush will need to take some action on Iran... I&#039;m just not sure what can be done other than strategic strikes to their nuke equipment.  But, like you pointed out, nuclear is different and we cannot afford to allow them to aquire this technology.

&quot;If we come through it all and out the other end, we can argue party politics in a peaceful and democratic way at a later date. Just pray that you get the opportunity. &quot;

I really wish this could happen but the &#039;gotcha&#039; mentality is just embedded too deep in the political landscape.  Kind of sad!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jon,</p>
<p>&#8220;Saddam Hussain had something the west wanted and that was oil and now we got it with a whole load of trouble to boot. Taking Iraq militarily was a fairly easy option and one that was simple to sell the public as Saddam was a bad man anyway, and I think behind-the-curtains, everybody knew there was no WMDÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>I keep hearing everybody say that &#8216;we knew that there weren&#8217;t any WMD&#8217;s in Iraq&#8217; yet they never cite anything that showed this before the invasion.  If you are using the information gained as a result of the invasion that wasn&#8217;t available to us &#8216;before&#8217; the invasion so you are armchair quarterbacking&#8230; show me something that we had before the invasion that would prove that Iraq didn&#8217;t have WMDs.  If there was even the possibility that he did, given his stance against the US, then we would have been remiss had we not gone in and checked.  Can you imagine the screamfest if Bush hadn&#8217;t gone into Iraq and they did have WMDs that they gave to a terrorist to use in our country?  If that had happened then I would have been one of the ones calling for Bush&#8217;s head&#8230;. why, because even after such a severe attack on the US Bush didn&#8217;t take the terrorist threats seriously&#8230;  </p>
<p>&#8220;Neuclear is diffferent and Iran will use it on Israel without batting an eyelid. This is the real deal now. I donÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢t think Bush should need to convince any of us that we need to stop them. Saddam was a gangster, and a brutal one at that and knew how to play the game. He has now had his hands slapped but its not IraqiÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s that are stirring all the trouble for our troops, its Iran who is at the centre of it all. The latest terrorist attacks on us all just sped up the process of dismantling it bit by bit.&#8221;</p>
<p>I agree with this, I believe that Bush will need to take some action on Iran&#8230; I&#8217;m just not sure what can be done other than strategic strikes to their nuke equipment.  But, like you pointed out, nuclear is different and we cannot afford to allow them to aquire this technology.</p>
<p>&#8220;If we come through it all and out the other end, we can argue party politics in a peaceful and democratic way at a later date. Just pray that you get the opportunity. &#8221;</p>
<p>I really wish this could happen but the &#8216;gotcha&#8217; mentality is just embedded too deep in the political landscape.  Kind of sad!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Grey - Liberty Dad</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/08/13/bush-talks-tough-on-iran/comment-page-1/#comment-1275</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Grey - Liberty Dad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Aug 2005 03:35:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=594#comment-1275</guid>
		<description>Jon W., America will certainly get the opportunity, even if San Diego or Miami or New York is WMD&#039;d.  Tehran is NOT Mecca.

&lt;i&gt;and I think behind-the-curtains, everybody knew there was no WMDÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s.&lt;/i&gt;
This is terribly false.  The Downing Street Memo stuff shows that everybody &quot;knew&quot; Saddam had WMDs, as much as they &quot;knew&quot; Al Capone was committing crimes -- just no smoking gun.  And what they knew was wrong.

But you are absolutely right about &quot;the real deal.&quot;  Iran getting nukes, and giving them to some terrorists.  It&#039;s a race between Iranian scientists and Iraqi democratic compromisers.

How much federalism in Iraq?  How to split the oil revenues?  (Really too bad a Trust Fund, with Iraq oil revenue directly to the people, hadn&#039;t been set up &quot;as a default.&quot;  Bush-Bremer mistake.)

The troops in Iraq are ideally placed for a strike against Iran.  Sorry, I don&#039;t believe Iran ground forces would be any tougher than Iraq; possibly less tough (is that possible???).

I thought Israel would attack Iran if Kerry had been elected; glad that fear wasn&#039;t tested.  Israel does NOT want Tel Aviv nuked.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jon W., America will certainly get the opportunity, even if San Diego or Miami or New York is WMD&#8217;d.  Tehran is NOT Mecca.</p>
<p><i>and I think behind-the-curtains, everybody knew there was no WMDÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s.</i><br />
This is terribly false.  The Downing Street Memo stuff shows that everybody &#8220;knew&#8221; Saddam had WMDs, as much as they &#8220;knew&#8221; Al Capone was committing crimes &#8212; just no smoking gun.  And what they knew was wrong.</p>
<p>But you are absolutely right about &#8220;the real deal.&#8221;  Iran getting nukes, and giving them to some terrorists.  It&#8217;s a race between Iranian scientists and Iraqi democratic compromisers.</p>
<p>How much federalism in Iraq?  How to split the oil revenues?  (Really too bad a Trust Fund, with Iraq oil revenue directly to the people, hadn&#8217;t been set up &#8220;as a default.&#8221;  Bush-Bremer mistake.)</p>
<p>The troops in Iraq are ideally placed for a strike against Iran.  Sorry, I don&#8217;t believe Iran ground forces would be any tougher than Iraq; possibly less tough (is that possible???).</p>
<p>I thought Israel would attack Iran if Kerry had been elected; glad that fear wasn&#8217;t tested.  Israel does NOT want Tel Aviv nuked.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon Wright</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/08/13/bush-talks-tough-on-iran/comment-page-1/#comment-1255</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon Wright</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Aug 2005 10:36:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=594#comment-1255</guid>
		<description>With all due respect, you can&#039;t compare Iraq with Iran. Both hate each other anyway and have or at least had, two totally different ideologies.

Saddam Hussain had something the west wanted and that was oil and now we got it with a whole load of trouble to boot.  Taking Iraq militarily was a fairly easy option and one that was simple to sell the public as Saddam was a bad man anyway, and I think behind-the-curtains, everybody knew there was no WMD&#039;s. 

Iran is different in that the Mad Mullah&#039;s hate the West and want it distroyed. Sure they got oil, but the West know they can&#039;t take that so easiliy by force as Iran is very capable and modern. So we left them alone until now.

Neuclear is diffferent and Iran will use it on Israel without batting an eyelid. This is the real deal now. I don&#039;t think Bush should need to convince any of us that we need to stop them. Saddam was a gangster, and a brutal one at that and knew how to play the game. He has now had his hands slapped but its not Iraqi&#039;s that are stirring all the trouble for our troops, its Iran who is at the centre of it all. The latest terrorist attacks on us all just sped up the process of dismantling it bit by bit.

Its not the time to be hand wringing now, its time to be strong and draw a line in the sand and going with it. Decide which ideology you subscribe to and defend it.

The West embraces long life. Iran glorifies death and they will bring it to us make no mistake about it. They just need the capability and they are not far away. Make your choice.

If we come through it all and out the other end, we can argue party politics in a peaceful and democratic way at a later date. Just pray that you get the opportunity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With all due respect, you can&#8217;t compare Iraq with Iran. Both hate each other anyway and have or at least had, two totally different ideologies.</p>
<p>Saddam Hussain had something the west wanted and that was oil and now we got it with a whole load of trouble to boot.  Taking Iraq militarily was a fairly easy option and one that was simple to sell the public as Saddam was a bad man anyway, and I think behind-the-curtains, everybody knew there was no WMD&#8217;s. </p>
<p>Iran is different in that the Mad Mullah&#8217;s hate the West and want it distroyed. Sure they got oil, but the West know they can&#8217;t take that so easiliy by force as Iran is very capable and modern. So we left them alone until now.</p>
<p>Neuclear is diffferent and Iran will use it on Israel without batting an eyelid. This is the real deal now. I don&#8217;t think Bush should need to convince any of us that we need to stop them. Saddam was a gangster, and a brutal one at that and knew how to play the game. He has now had his hands slapped but its not Iraqi&#8217;s that are stirring all the trouble for our troops, its Iran who is at the centre of it all. The latest terrorist attacks on us all just sped up the process of dismantling it bit by bit.</p>
<p>Its not the time to be hand wringing now, its time to be strong and draw a line in the sand and going with it. Decide which ideology you subscribe to and defend it.</p>
<p>The West embraces long life. Iran glorifies death and they will bring it to us make no mistake about it. They just need the capability and they are not far away. Make your choice.</p>
<p>If we come through it all and out the other end, we can argue party politics in a peaceful and democratic way at a later date. Just pray that you get the opportunity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rachel</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2005/08/13/bush-talks-tough-on-iran/comment-page-1/#comment-1248</link>
		<dc:creator>Rachel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Aug 2005 20:30:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=594#comment-1248</guid>
		<description>I seriously doubt W. would even have the votes of a predominately Republican house to start up something with Iran. And for all those who argue we should have gone to Iran instead, on what grounds? It would have been under the same grey area as Iraq (and other wars, when one thinks about it.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I seriously doubt W. would even have the votes of a predominately Republican house to start up something with Iran. And for all those who argue we should have gone to Iran instead, on what grounds? It would have been under the same grey area as Iraq (and other wars, when one thinks about it.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

