McCain Say U.S. Must Keep Military Option Open in Dealing With Iran

[NNN0LHI]

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGB0PAKHDCE.html

WASHINGTON (AP) - The president must keep open a military option in dealing with Iran and its nuclear program, Sen. John McCain said Sunday, calling recent Bush comments appropriate.

"For us to say that the Iranians can do whatever they want to do and we won't under any circumstances exercise a military option would be for them to have a license to do whatever they want to do," the Arizona Republican said on "Fox News Sunday." "So I think the president's comment that we won't take anything off the table was entirely appropriate."

Bush said on Israeli TV on Friday that "all options are on the table" regarding Iran, which rejected Thursday's resolution from the United Nations' nuclear agency urging it to halt the conversion of uranium into gas.

The U.S. government and others fear Iran's nuclear work is secretly designed to produce nuclear weapons. Iran's leaders deny that, saying it is only for the generation of electricity.

[bahrbearian]

1. Of course you always have a military option, but you don't need

to bring it up, if your seriously working for diplomacy.

[Vincardog]

6. AS if your seriously working for diplomacy/ The death cult does not

ever seriously work for diplomacy

[jobycom]

29. Exactly. Everyone knows you have a big stick, so you don't have to say it.

When you start talking about using the military, the other guy starts preparing for war. Then you have no options left.

Given that we invaded Iraq even though they were complying with our requirements, no nation will trust our diplimocy again, anyway. It is made worse by illiterate jackasses like Bush and his house-broken lapdog McCain.

[Inland]

35. Right. Pretty simple all the way around. nt

[Oerdin]

68. Agreed.

The option must be there but sabre rattle doesn't help the diplomatic process to much. I suppose the US and the EU could be playing a god cop/bad cop routine to try and carrot & stike the Iranians to giving up uranium enrichment but I'm not sure that will work.

The problem is I'm not sure what other route could successfully be tried. Over the last three years the EU has offered several financial packages to help the Iranians give up their nuclear industry but the Iranians keep insisting they have a right to be a nuclear power. Other then the oil sector their economy is in the tank so I suspect the mullahs are using this as a way to build national pride and gain leverage over their opponents just as North Korea has done.

[Vincardog]

2. Will it ever end? The thought of a sovereign country

having a license to do whatever they want to do is so contrary to the NeoCon way? They are showing their true colors.

[NNN0LHI]

10. No such thing as a non-nuclear armed sovereign country any more

Thats what it has come down to in the year 2005. You either have a nuclear deterrent and you are free or you don't have a nuclear deterrent and will be subject to invasion on the whim of assholes like McCain. Thats just the way it is.

Don

[HockeyMom]

3. Little late on the agenda but,

Bush has his man Bolton in place. The chips are all falling in line for the attack on Iran. But unless we are attacked on our soil again, whether real or staged (wouldn't put it past them), will the public support this war in Iran? At this point unless the preceding occurs, I don't think so.

[Rose Siding]

4. Wolcott: McCain's simply Dick Cheney with a better backstory

Just got through reading James' write-up about this interview....

McCain will hear none of this defeatist talk. "We can't afford to fail," he emptily intoned, and then cleaved to Bush, claiming that Bush is no cold-hearted monster with no time for a Cindy Sheehan, no:
"He cares, and he grieves."

Message: He cares. Bring 'em on. Watch this shot.

It was also clear from the tone of McCain's remarks that he favors military action against Iran. It's difficult to think of any military action he wouldn't favor.

This man is too dangerous to let anywhere near the presidency. He's simply Dick Cheney with a better backstory.

http://jameswolcott.com/archives/2005/08/theres_only_one.php

[Mairead]

34. Bingo! He's a pillock and always has been. (Why any real Dem

would give him the time of day is beyond me)

[MADem]

64. The reason Dems give him the time of day at all

...is BECAUSE of his backstory. Damn near the anchorman at the Academy, child of privilege, screwup, wrecked two aircraft before he was shot down and was not removed from flight status, bit of a rogue in his youth (and post-POW, when he dumped his first wife who was very ill and screwed around like a crazy man) but he rose to the occasion at the Hanoi Hilton, and conducted himself well. That was his finest hour...

Democrats are by nature more empathetic. They tend to take people at their word. And they believe that people can change their hearts.

Having said that, I agree that McCain is on the WRONG track with regard to military options. He should be pushing and shoving diplomacy, instead, he constantly waves the dire "military option" warning as his opening salvo. In this climate, it is unhelpful.

[saigon68]

67. McCain was in the hanoi hilton too long

[mike_c]

5. um-- what right does the U.S. have to keep the Iranians...

...from doing "whatever they want to do?"

[The Blue Knight]

7. I'm sorry, but what military?

Last I checked, all our resources were bogged down in Iraq. Wtf is with all this tough-talk. The iranians know we can't do shit.

[evermind]

13. The credible threat is not invasion, but air strikes

on Iranian facilities. That can easily be accomplished by US forces, despite being stretched in terms of ground troops.

What is interesting, though, is where air strikes could be launched from... If they did it from bases in Iraq (an obvious candidate in one sense) how would the current Iraqi "government" react, given the new military accord between Iraq and Iran?

They've done strikes in the middle east from the UK before now, but given the latest statement from (UK foreign secretary) Straw, I don't think that's on the cards.

Probably they could do it from an aircraft carrier somewhere round there, though, or just sanction an Israeli attack.

[TahitiNut]

22. Yep. Coupled with the probable use of "tactical" nukes.

The US military is literally under no rule of law in Iraq, being exempt by virtue of written accords from any sovereign law, national or international. In other words, there's nobody there to say we can't do whatever we fucking want to - not Congress, not Iraq, and not the UN. Nobody. We're an outlaw nation.

[Kool Kitty]

51. Didn't the VP just have plans drawn up for an attack on Iran

that included both conventional and nuclear weapons? They'll just bomb the shit out of them with *ahem* mini-nukes and then watch the shit hit the fan. I find it hard to believe that the rest of the world would not want to weigh in on that. (What the hell is a mini-nuke, anyway? Does such a thing even exist?)

[Vincardog]

9. sactly

[Karenina]

8. Just keep on fixing the intelligence

around the POLICY OF AGGRESION!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1699657

[DefenseLawyer]

11. McCain is the hooker with a heart of gold

but at the end of the day he's still a just a republican whore.

[leesa]

12. Iran hasn't done anything you souless warmonger.

[mikehiggins]

14. Okay NOW will the McCain fans on DU

WAKE THE F*#( UP????

This guy is a disaster and should be opposed just as vehemently as the Bozo-in-Chief.

This is not an attempt to woo the right-wingers. This is what he really thinks, and no one should confuse themselves over that point.

And Kerry even toyed with the idea of having this man on the ticket?

[NNN0LHI]

45. [crickets/] n/t

[uppityperson]

15. We'll threaten, just not use them. Right

[IndianaGreen]

16. The ignorance about Iran that these bozos display

is the same ignorance that told them Iraqis will be singing and dancing in the streets if America invaded.

[NNN0LHI]

18. Its not ignorance

These guys don't mind fighting to the very last drop of someone else's blood. This screwball was demanding American boots on the ground a week into Kosovo too. Whats that tell you? He is ate up.

Don

[TheCowsCameHome]

47. Only now they sing and dance after a bomb kills US military personnel

Technical point, eh Mr. Bush? Mr. Cheney? Mr. Powell? Mr. Rumsfeld?

Helllllllooooo - anyone in there?

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

17. He's going to be on "Fox News Sunday" tonight...

...and I assume he'll deliver the same message in your post.

GOOD doggie, John!

SIT!

GOOD doggie!

FETCH!

GOOD doggie!

ROLL OVER!

GOOD doggie!



:grr:

[HughBeaumont]

27. Keep eating monkey ass, Maverick!!

That picture makes me almost as ill as Fat Pat Purple Heart BandAid Peale's.



Stepin Fetchit McCain should step in a leash out in the Blight House back lawn and make nice with Barney.

[daleo]

37. Those have got to be dentures.

Not that it matters, but I never really looked closely before.

Anyway, Yikes!

[HughBeaumont]

60. From what I hear . . .

The same ones George Washington used.

NAS tee.

[Benhurst]

33. McCain should go back to doing what he does best,

sniffing Dubya's armpit.

[othermeans]

19. What military option? The Boy Scouts? eom

[Hardrada]

21. Girl Scouts, The Luther League. The Odd Fellows

Knights of Pythias, the Junior League, 33rd Degree Masons

[htuttle]

25. Plus, The Salvation Army, The Knights of Columbus...

...Veterans of Foreign Wars Women's Auxilliary, and the United Parcel Service.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

43. Luther League says no more war.

the rest of them can handle this one.

[Hardrada]

52. Good for them!

I used to be one.

[htuttle]

20. We have no legal unilateral military option

The "military option" they speak of is illegal. The ONLY legal military option is through the UN, or in response to Iran somehow managing to attack the California coast.

Even if Iran was proven to be supplying the Iraqi resistance, that wouldn't satisfy the 'self-defense' conditions laid out in Article 51, IMHO. We'd have to take it to the Security Council.

[TahitiNut]

24. The US no longer recognizes any legal restrictions whatsoever.

We're an outlaw nation. We've dismissed the Geneva Conventions as "quaint," regard the UN as "outmoded," and illicitly exempted ourselves from the ICC. The international community of nations, under the principles of a "court of last resort," have until about 2010 to coalesce prosecutorially against the war crimes of the US. That's the length of the rope we have to hang ourselves.

[Malikshah]

23. McCain can go screw himself with a bamboo pole

He has completely lost it and pissed away any authority/honor whatever folks would give him.

[acmavm]

32. Yep, that's exactly what the guy can do. Remember, he was just a

plea bargain away from prison. And his war record is based on the fact that he got CAUGHT and SURVIVED. In military terms, he failed then lived to talk about it.

I never ever never ever have found one single thing admirable about the man. And I do very much remember the Keating Seven. McCain has no integrity, he is not at all honest, and he is not the brightest bulb in the pack.

I cannot stand the 'man'.

[HughBeaumont]

26. Get these warmongering mothereffers the HELL out of my country.

ANY nuclear buildup, development or testing any country has is a reaction to US buildup and neo-clown bloodlust. Why do 60,000 people on DU get it but the rest of Dumberica doesn't?

Oh wait, I forgot. "Adrift" foreign policy simply is bad for business.

[still_one]

28. go screw yourself mccain. You voted for iraq

and this administration, which believes in torture, therefore you believe in torture no matter what you say

[The_Casual_Observer]

30. Strap mccain to the first bomb they drop on Iran.

That way he can have a personal roll in the next "march to freedom"

[sintax]

31. Has anyone heard about US having underground

weapons storage/capabilities on the road between Bagdhad and Airport? A reliable DUer put this out last night and I hadn't heard this before. The slant was that these were underground sights with which to launch small nukes.

Don't forget the nuclear loaded subs in the region.

[goforit]

36. McCain?...You are a schmuck!

[VegasWolf]

38. Whose military options, McCain? Theirs or ours? nt

[Maggie_May]

39. They can stick their military option

where the sun don't shine. They are not taking my son.

[Spinzonner]

40. It's time to start referring the Republicans as the WAR Party

every chance we get

[54anickel]

41. What's he gonna say when he finds out the uranium was Khan's?

See what happens when you war-monger before all the evidence is weighed? Freakin' a$$holes.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1699657

[ngGale]

42. Strike three for McCain ...

he's out of my sites. Never could get the W kiss out of my mind anyway. Argh!

[meganmonkey]

44. Oh fuck

This is really going to happen, isn't it?

:scared:

[Old Vet]

46. McCain has zero credibility anymore, Period, See Ya.........

[meganmonkey]

48. I don't give half a shit that it is McCain saying it

I am just concerned that I have seen so many headlines in the last few days about Iran and military action.

[Lerkfish]

50. yup. Its going to happen.

bend over and pucker up, world.

[SixStrings]

49. Such hypocrites...

WASHINGTON (AP) - China must keep open a military option in dealing with the US and its nuclear program, a Chinese official said Sunday.

"For us to say that the Americans can do whatever they want to do and we won't under any circumstances exercise a military option would be for them to have a license to do whatever they want to do," the Chinese official said on "Fox News Sunday." "So I think that our comment that we won't take anything off the table was entirely appropriate."

The Chinese official said on Israeli TV on Friday that "all options are on the table" regarding the US, which rejected yet another resolution from the United Nations.

The Chinese government and others fear America's nuclear work is secretly designed to produce nuclear weapons. American leaders deny that, saying it is only for the generation of electricity."

[Theduckno2]

53. Excellent perspective SixStrings!

There is no legal or moral justification for military action against Iran, given the CURRENT dispute over the Iranian nuclear program. Period. Wars are legal only if you (or allies) are attacked or under imminent threat of such. Conflating possible future scenarios with the current situation is wrong and as far as I'm concerned McCain in just a Bushco minion!
P.S. IMHO "preventative wars" are illegal!!!

[AuntieM1957]

54. What does Karl have on McCain?

Man, I actually used to respect the senator from Arizona.

Not that I agreed with him often, but I respected his integrity.

What has happened to him? He endured the Viet Cong, and now is content to be Bushie's lap dog?

Not much of a legacy, Senator. Not much at all.

[Azathoth]

55. McCain has been marked for death by the evangelical wing of the GOP

His rabid, blinding ambition has overtaken his integrity. He knows the only way he'll ever have a shot at the GOP nomination for President is to surgically graft his lips to Dubya/Karl Rove's collective ass.

[AuntieM1957]

69. trying to shake your imagery out of my head LOL!

"rabid, blinding ambition" seems to be a political disease affecting both parties lately.

e.g., just how many of our Dem leaders have even spoken Cindy's name?

they think they'll lose their chances with the "center" if they do.

but we here are the foot soldiers of this battle - and I say they need us, badly.

If any of the DLC or DNC read this, pay attention.

It's time to speak up - or we're moving on!

[democracy eh]

56. China will not allow the US to gain control of Iranian oil

Like they have in Iraq.

[lovuian]

57. McCain was cheering us on to go to war with Iraq!!!

He is a JERK!!!

[shantipriya]

58. McCain

McCain--unprincipled SOB!!!

[Barkley]

59. According to globalsecurity.org:

“In all, there are perhaps two dozen suspected nuclear facilities in Iran …air strikes on Iran would vastly exceed the scope of the 1981 Israeli attack on the Osiraq nuclear center in Iraq, and would more resemble the opening days of the 2003 air campaign against Iraq.”

“Target Iran - Air Strikes.” http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iran-strikes.htm

[54anickel]

63. Interesting read, lots of assumptions being made

But the preponderance of evidence and reasoning leads to the assumption that there is no underground nuclear infrastructure, and that the above ground infrastructure constitutes Iran's nuclear weapons program.

snip>

Some sources suggest that Iran could complete development of its first nuclear weapon in 2005. US Undersecretary of State John Bolton has said Teheran told Britain, France and Germany that Iran could enrich enough uranium for a nuclear weapon within a year. "If we permit Iran's deception to go on much longer, it will be too late," Bolton told the Hudson Institute on 17 August 2004. "Iran will have nuclear weapons."

snip>

Iran might launch pre-emptive strikes to protect its nuclear facilities if they are threatened, Defence Minister Ali Shamkhani said in remarks broadcast on 20 August 2004 . "We won't sit with our hands tied and wait until someone does something to us," Shamkhani told Arabic channel Al Jazeera when asked what Iran would do if the United States or Israel attacked its atomic facilities. "Some military leaders in Iran are convinced that the pre-emptive measures that America is talking about are not their right alone," he added in Persian. "Any strike on our nuclear facilities will be regarded as a strike on Iran and we will respond with all our might."

Defence Minister Ali Shamkhani said "Where Israel is concerned, we have no doubt that it is an evil entity, and it will not be able to launch any military operation without an American green light. You cannot separate the two. ... The US military presence (in Iraq) will not become an element of strength (for Washington) at our expense. The opposite is true, because their forces would turn into a hostage" in Iranian hands in the event of an attack.

Did the US actually sell all that munitions listed to Israel?

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

61. HIM again??? *yawn*

Go home, McCain. Nobody likes you.

[wallwriter]

62. Two words: Presidential Ambition.

And they said that Kerry would say and do anything? This takes the cake.

[Megahurtz]

65. SHADDUP McCain! n/t

[Karmadillo]

66. The Democratic Party agrees with him. "Repeated and unwarned strikes"

are called for.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/08/14/democrats_embrace_tough_military_stance

Democrats embrace tough military stance
Sharpen message on foreign policy

WASHINGTON -- After months of internal debate and closed-door discussions, Democrats have begun to develop a more aggressive foreign policy that focuses heavily on threats they say are being neglected by the Bush administration, while avoiding taking a contentious stance on Iraq.

Even Democrats who have been associated with liberal positions on international affairs are calling for more troops in uniform, proposing that threats of force be used to stop nuclear weapons programs in Iran and North Korea, and pressing for potential military intervention to ease famine and oppression around the world.

<edit>

The emerging message among Democrats reflects a recognition that winning congressional and presidential elections in the post-Sept. 11 era requires candidates to establish a willingness to use America's military might and keep the nation safe, according to party leaders and strategists.

<edit>

The top Democrats in the House and Senate issued a report last month that harshly critiqued Bush administration efforts to keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorists. The report -- endorsed by the House minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, and the Senate minority leader, Harry Reid -- details Iranian and North Korean steps toward building nuclear weapons, and lagging efforts to secure ''loose nukes" in Russia that could fall into the hands of terrorists.

The report calls for the United States to engage in more direct negotiations with Iran and North Korea, and for the talks to be reinforced with military pressure, including ''the possibility of repeated and unwarned strikes."

more...

[Karmadillo]

70. Kick

n/t