Kristol: "the serious, 'realistic,' policy on Iran now is now to help accelerate 'regime change' "
June 28, 2009 11:15 am ET
From the June 28 edition of FOX's Fox News Sunday:
Expand All
Expand 1st Level
Collapse All
Media Matters: The right-wing media's election analysis just ain't that good
The Friday Rush: For conservatives, $400 million buys defeat at the ballot box
The myth of Fox News' ratings spike
By brilliant I thought you meant he remembered to put his sippy cup out of frame.
Seriously though, giving these doofuses (per Merriam Webster) the time of day is a waste of electrons, photons and Higgs particles. When in 8 years has Kristol been correct? And Hume wouldn't know how to perform diplomacy if it were in his IFB and on the TelePrompTer at the same time.
This guy is in his own reality half the time. Not only that, he was for everything Bush did, then after it went to hell, he said "well, it wasn't done right".
Good grief, man.
We are getting a lot of this: <
What we need from you is this: _
(All right, there are those, myself among them who will argue that he had no credibility to lose. But why let facts get in the way of a good, er, decent (?) joke? We certainly didn't let them get in the way of a disastrous war.),
forces are about at their limit and the rightwing would like more.When this country (usa) start paying out all those claims that our young soldiers will be making from going to the war zone back to back, maybe they will change their tune. All the Va.doctors can do is sign the checks.
These guys really can't help themselves, can they? It almost comes off like an addiction or a fetish for them.
Regime change and extramarital affairs: the neoKKKons' two favorite hobbies.
{Although, they prefer to be active participants only in the latter . . .}
If anything, such a policy would result in the Iranians vigorously renewing their nuclear arms program. It would also get a bunch of pro-western Iranians arrested and/or killed. Mostly, though, it would result in the Iranian people uniting IN SUPPORT of the current regime.
The Iranian people remember the 1952 coup... in which the CIA orchestrated the overthrow of their democratically elected government, and the plopping down of the Shah upon the Peacock Throne... as if it were yesterday. They well remember how he followed policies that were pro-US and pro-oil industry, and how he engaged in torture and oppression against the Iranian people. We were more than OK with his harsh and anti-democratic activities, because it kept cheap oil flowing in our direction.
The Iranian people also vividly remember that it was with our approval and logistical support that Saddam launched his military invasion of Iran, seeking both to seize their oil fields and to institute 'regime change' against their government. He was OUR thug then, and engaged in his war of aggression at our behest.
Herr Kristol is truly a fascist, and an unrepentant and contemptable chickenhawk. He cares nothing for democracy, and even less for human life. He continues to advocate of policies that are certain to further destabilise the Middle East and to f**k us up. Obama has been pursuing the exactly correct policies in regard to Iran. He has been subtly and adroitly massaging their understandable paranoia where it comes to the US government. We need to engage them DIPLOMATICALLY, and move away from the neocon's historically and disastrously failed approach.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/26/AR2009062603986.html
Here's the paragraph he's talking about:
"It's still too early to say whether Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Mr. Ahmadinejad will succeed in their hard-line coup; de facto opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi remains publicly defiant. Yet it is becoming quite clear -- for all who care to see it -- what the Khamenei-Ahmadinejad regime will offer if it survives: harsh repression at home and unrelenting hostility toward the West. If the regime chooses to "engage" at all with the United States, it will be to bolster its shaky legitimacy, not to surrender its nuclear program or its support for terrorism. The only plausible path toward ending the threat it poses is that demanded by the demonstrators: regime change."
So why is there not some MMfA article denouncing the Washington Post editorial?