Politicians.

Post by **MichelleH** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 3:38 pm

A worthy honor...

An Honor That Bush Is Unlikely to Embrace

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/25/washi ... ename.html

From the Department of Damned-With-Faint-Praise, a group going by the regal-sounding name of the Presidential Memorial Commission of San Francisco is planning to ask voters here to change the name of a prize-winning water treatment plant on the shoreline to the George W. Bush Sewage Plant.

And the best part....

The renaming would take effect on Jan. 20, when the new president is sworn in. And regardless of the measure’s outcome, supporters plan to commemorate the inaugural with a synchronized flush of hundreds of thousands of San Francisco toilets....

Ishtar · Post by **Ishtar** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:09 pm

Please watch this brilliant speech by Senator Ron Paul on a potential nuclear strike on Iran, and why the threat of war with Iran is pushing the price of oil up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7354M1Qm ... pic=2373.0

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 8:05 pm

Paul is a Congressman from Texas, not a senator.

Ishtar · Post by **Ishtar** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 10:50 pm

Minimalist wrote:Paul is a Congressman from Texas, not a senator.

I stand corrrected.

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Jul 02, 2008 10:55 pm

Easy mistake to make.

One has to be a real, first rate asshole to get elected to the Senate in Texas.

Forum Monk · Post by **Forum Monk** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 4:59 am

Nuclear strike on Iran? Ron Paul is being very provacative and irresponsible to suggest such a thing. First of all, why would we need to resort to should extremes and face the derision of all peoples for eternity?

While a first strike is always a possibility, it seems inconceivable to me, that Bush could muster the support and resources to execute such an action within the few remaining months he has in office. I think it's just saber rattling.

Ishtar · Post by **Ishtar** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 5:57 am

He's just saying he's "not taking it off the table" which sounds like sabre rattling to me. But I would call Bush the irresponsible one, for failing to withdraw the threat, and not Ron Paul who is merely calling attention to it, and how its pushing up oil prices.

(There ... I knew it wouldn't be long before we found something to disagree about!

Normal service is now resumed!

)

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 6:39 am

While a first strike is always a possibility, it seems inconceivable to me, that Bush could muster the support and resources to execute such an action within the few remaining months he has in office. I think it's just saber rattling.

HOw much "support" does he need to order an airstrike which would fuck things up for the next four lifetimes?

Ishtar · Post by **Ishtar** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 6:52 am

Minimalist wrote:
How much "support" does he need to order an airstrike which would fuck things up for the next four lifetimes?

I didn't know you believed in reincarnation, Min? Is this part of your new drive towards becoming a New Ager?

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 8:28 am

Equally Min if Iran does manufactur a nuclear device do you think they will not use it against Israel and to Hell with where the fall out lands. Such a bomb would actually kill and injure far more Arabs than Jews.
If Israel destroys an Iranian production facility the Arab world will condemn her outright, whilst secretly breathing a great sigh of relief.
Iranians are not Arabic, tney are predominantly Shia and are more loathed by Sunni Moslems than are Jews and Christians.
Neither Jordan, Iraq, Syria, Saudi or Egypt would like Iran to have a bomb but cannot publicly condemn a 'brother' state.

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 10:31 am

Pakistan already has the bomb, Dig, and is one cheap bullet away from changing sides.

Personally, I would not bet on Musharaf's longevity. So much for the fears of an "Islamic bomb." It already exists.

The US and USSR sat with 5,000 warheads aimed at each other for 50 years and never pulled the trigger. Why do you assume that Iran is any more ready to commit national suicide that either of those 2?

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 11:14 am

Suicide of a nation is simply suicide of a lot of individuals Min and those that light the blue touch paper have a bolt hole available or I'll eat my hat.
Iran has a lot of past history with other Islamic states, look up Suleiman the so call Magnificant to see what I mean.
Also during the cold war there were protaganists on both sides prepared to risk it. Curtis LeMay certainly was.
Also remember that the Iranian President is on the record as stating that distruction of this world is a pre requisite for Mohammed to return and create the new world.
At least the USA and USSR were not actually desiring the apocalypse.

rich · Post by **rich** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 12:25 pm

Yeah but - this is the true scenario for THE END:

righ now there are over 6.6 billion people on the face of this earth and the number continues to grow. That means there are at least that many farts all happening in the course of 24 hours. One of these days the inevitability of everyone farting at the same time is going to happen and some schmuck is going to be standing there lighting a match - BOOM.
I'd hate to see the fireball comin'!