HILLARY CLINTON WILLING TO "OBLITERATE" IRAN - THIS LADY HAS NO MORALS

The more I consider Hillary Clinton's reckless and obscene words toward what she would do if president in the case of an Iranian attack against Israel, the less I think of her as a person and as a stateman. That she would say that the U.S. would obliterate Iran shows that this lady has no ethics or morals when it comes to using America's military force.

To obliterate Iran would be to kill hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of innocent Iranian civilians. And Clinton facilely says she is prepared to do this.

• Is Hillary Clinton thus any better than George Bush who has caused the death of over 600,000 Iraqi civilians by his reckless invasion and war?
• Is she any better than Joe Lieberman who is itching to start a war with Iran on behalf of Israel?
• Is she morally superior in any way to Harry Truman who opted to drop a nuclear bomb on both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, thus causing over 200,000 human beings to be incinerated?

The answer is, Hillary Clinton is no better than those war criminals when it comes to willingness to bomb and kill civilians in the interests of American foreign policy. This lady should not be president. Or else we doomed to continue the cycle of endless war against anyone or any country that someone like George Bush or Hillary Clinton considers the "enemy."

DON'T LET BUSH START A WAR WITH IRAN

Hooray for Gordon Brown. The British Prime Minister is refusing to toe the Bush/Cheney line that Iran should never be allowed a nuclear weapon. In contrast to those push-overs, Nicolas Sarkozy and German Minister Angela Merkel, Brown is resisting the march of Bush and Cheney towards war with Iran. Thanks to ThinkProgress.com for discovering the story in The Telegram.

Tim Shipman and Philip Sherwell write in the Telegram.co.uk that Bush is becoming impatient with Brown.

"Allies of Condoleeza Rice, the US Secretary of State, have told The Sunday Telegraph that the Prime Minister should emulate France's President Nicolas Sarkozy and warn that Iran may face military action, in order to help avert a new war in the Middle East. . . .

"The concerns reflect growing irritation in Washington, from the White House down, that Mr Brown will not match his more robust private conversations on Iran with hard-hitting public statements that would put pressure on the Teheran regime."

It seems that all Bush, Cheney, Lieberman, Rice and the rest of the neo-cons want is to drum up support for bombing Iran. ThinkProgress.com reports on John Bolton's smear today of Mohamed El Baradei , head of the International Atomic Energy Agency of the United Nations, for saying that Iran does not have an active nuclear weapon program:

"Two weeks ago, Mohamed El Baradei, the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said on CNN that an attack on Iran would “lead absolutely to disaster.” He added that there is no evidence of a “concrete, active nuclear weapon program” going on inside Iran.

"Today on CNN’s Late Edition, neconservative warhawk John Bolton responded by smearing ElBaradei as “an apologist for Iran” and said the United States is “paying the price” for not opposing him more vociferously."

By the way, we are hearing too much from John Bolton lately. Bolton is always trying to incite a war someplace in the world. He would like nothing better than to bomb North Korea and Iran at the same time.

BUSH/CHENEY TAKE AIM AT IRAN; LIBERMAN MAKES CASE FOR WAR

Ewen MacAskill and Julian Borg write today in The Guardian that Cheney is winning the debate in the administration on striking Iran before the Bush/Cheney cabal is out of office in January 2009. This is serious stuff. Bush is crazy and stubborn enough to start another war against Iran, no matter what the consequences for world peace for the next hundred years.

If this is not bad enough, Think Progress points to a Senate resolution passed 97-0 last Wednesday. Sponsored principally by Joe Lieberman, it calls upon Iran to stop killing U.S. soldiers in Iraq. Lieberman claims he has the "evidence." He says that Gen. Kevin Bergner, formerly White House aide to Bush and now principal military spokesman in Iraq, knows that Iran is sending fighters to kill Americans in Iraq. Here's a few paragraphs from Lieberman's amendment 2073 from the Senate record. Keep in mind that no one in the Senate had the courage to stand up and say that the "evidence" is non-existent and that the Iranian connection is just spin from Bush and Cheney to advance their casus belli against a non-Arab Islamic nation.

"The fact is that for months and months now, our military commanders and diplomats have been telling us about a proxy war the Iranians have been waging against our soldiers, other coalition forces, and our allies in Iraq. Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of multinational forces, and others, have spoken bluntly and publicly and I would say repeatedly about how the Iranian Quds Force, an elite unit of the Iranian Guard Force, has been training, arming, funding, equipping, and directing the extremists in Iraq, terrorists who then go back into Iraq and attack our troops. This past February, senior military officials of ours in Baghdad described forensic evidence that implicated Iran at that time in the deaths of at least 170 American service members, and one may assume that the number has gone up significantly since then. That is 170 American service members killed as a result of the involvement of Iran through Iraqi terrorist allies in Iraq; lost lives of Americans as a result of what Iran and its proxies are doing.

"Last week, the United States military spokesman for the Multi-National Force Iraq, BG Kevin Bergner, presented new and I think stunning details about Iran's complicity in deadly attacks against our service members. I present this resolution to say to our military, at the beginning: We hear you, but also say to the Iranians: We see what you are doing and we are simply not going to accept it.

"The fact is, the previous warnings that have been given, and disclosures given by our military about Iranian involvement in Iraq, in some sense have drifted up into the media air which is so cluttered with so much else from the Middle East, from Iraq--so much controversy that it seems to not have settled into the collective consciousness of Members of Congress, let alone the American people, about what Iran is doing to our soldiers, our sons and daughters, our husbands and wives, our friends, our neighbors.

"It is time for the Senate to say to Iran: We know what you are doing. It is time for you to stop it."

Again, where is a voice from Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama protesting this fictitious story about Iran? How about Sen. Feingold or Sen. Webb or any of the other 50 Democrats in the Senate? Sen. Reid, how could you go along with this war monger Lieberman and preposterous dangerous story?

JOIN THE CAMPAIGN - DON'T LET BUSH & CHENEY START A WAR AGAINST IRAN

We need every reader and every blogger to join the campaign to prevent Bush and Cheney from starting a war against Iran.

It seems every single day, we hear politicians like Joe Lieberman calling for strikes against Iran. People like Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney. Even Democrats like Hillary Clinton and John Edwards say that as far as Iran nothing is off the table, implying that they would bomb and attack Iran.

Why does the United States government and its politicians think that Iran is the enemy? Or that we can solve the disagreements with Iran over its nuclear enrichment power plants by raining down bombs and missiles?

The U.S. thus appears to the rest of the world as the most aggressive, the most bellicose, the most militaristic county in the world.

Wars and bombs don't solve anything. Yet people like Bush and Lieberman continue to call for it.

The only way we can stop this madness is for everyone to make it his or her personal campaign to express and publicize in any and every possible that there are a lot of us who will resist this call for war against Iran.

NPR FEATURES JOE LIEBERMAN CALLING FOR ATTACKS ON IRAN

NPR's All Things Considered this afternoon had a piece by Mike Shuster on the call by some for a military attack against Iran. There was Joe Lieberman saying that the U.S. should attack Iran because Holy Joe said there was some "evidence" that Iran is supplying weapons and IEDs to the insurgents in Iraq.

That's a lot of bull. If Lieberman has evidence, then show it to the country. To date, there has been no credible evidence (i.e., that any court in the U.S. would accept as "evidence") that Iran is supplying weapons or bombs or IEDs to Iraq or any of the insurgents fighting the U.S. occupation within Iraq.

Joe Lieberman is a war monger who should have gone done to defeat in the last general election, only that his opponent Ned Lamont ran such a crummy campaign trying to introduce issues other than Iraq. Joe Lieberman is no better than war mongers Bush or Cheney who think they can push other sovereign countries around merely by bombing them into submission.

My question with NPR's ATC is why there were no guests opposing Holy Joe's Iran-bashing? Not all Washington thinks bombing Iran is the way to go. Surely there are many of us who believe we should be-friend Iran, not make them enemies for the next thousand years.

JOE LIEBERMAN GOES OFF THE DEEP END ABOUT IRAN

Think Progress has transcript and video of Joe Lieberman advocating a U.S. military strike against Iran. Holy Joe is crazier and more unbalanced than I thought. He has always supported this unjust war in Iraq, and now he is itching for widening the front to include Iran. Has he ever thought about sitting down with the government of Iran and talking through the problem? Perhaps the Iranians have a right to develop nuclear power. At this point there is no evidence, not one shred, that Iran is planning to attack the United States or Israel or any other country.