Do you think Bush (& Cheney) are capable of launching a nuclear strike?

[G_j]

of declaring martial law?
of instigating a false flag terror attack?

I DO

if any one of these is a possibility, then Impeachment is not a choice, it is an absolute necessity!

[acmavm]

1. In less than a heartbeat.

[Horse with no Name]

2. Short answer?

Yes.

[JTG of the PRB]

56. Short answer? Yes. Long answer?

YEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!! OH GOD, YES! SOMEBODY STOP THEM! YES YES YES YES YESYESYESYESYESYESYES!!!!!!!!!!!! YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!

Ahem.

[sutz12]

3. Yes, I do.

And it scares the shit outta me. :scared:

:kick:

[in_cog_ni_to]

4. ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY!

It's already planned, I'm sure.

IMPEACH! NOW!

[cassiepriam]

5. Of course.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

6. I believe their capable.

I'm also not going to lose any sleep over it.

There's plenty of credible reasons to support impeachment.

[rudy23]

7. I don't think they're capable of not doing it.

My gut tells me that this was high up on their checklist of what they wanted to get accomplished in office.

[CoffeeCat]

30. I think they expected to be in Iran by now...

Who knows with these worthless buffoons, but it seems like they
expected Iraq to go down like Gulf I--where the Iraqis wet their
pants and surrendered when they saw any American soldier.

Remember, "We'll be greeted as liberators!"? They thought this
was going to be a cakewalk and they underestimated the Iraqi
people. They thought the Iraqis were weak, easily duped and
that it would be easy to take over the entire country and
steal the oil.

I bet their initial plans had them all ready in Iran and Syria
by now.

The neocon-warmongering plan that they tried to implement is
a total myopic, ill-planned, perverse idea concocted by
sociopaths---and it is catastrophe.

Every forecast they had was wrong, and this insurgency was
an unanticipated consequence for which they NEVER had a plan.

They disgust me.

[peace13]

8. Martial law, false flag terror...yes.

Nuclear, I would hope that our service personnel would stop that cold. Peace, KIm

[G_j]

The Nuclear Option (read and weep)

a quick Google search:

The Nuclear Option in Iraq The Nuclear Option in Iraq The U.S. has lowered the bar for using the ultimate .... First, the Pentagon's nuclear posture review, signed by Rumsfeld in ...
www.commondreams.org/views03/0126-01.htm - 21k - Cached - Similar pages

Not Just A Last Resort?Surprisingly, however, global strike also includes a nuclear option, ... the Pentagon's quadrennial Nuclear Posture Review assigned the military and ...
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/14/AR2005051400071_pf.html - Similar pages

CNN.com - Hersh: U.S. mulls nuclear option for Iran - Apr 10, 2006I mean, he's absolutely right about a nuclear option, but there is ... HERSH: The New Yorker sent a long, detailed memorandum to the Pentagon on Tuesday. ...
www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/10/hersh.access/index.html - 53k - Cached - Similar pages

ZNet |Iran | America, Iran and the Nuclear OptionA Pentagon advisor told Hersh of a “resurgence of interest in tactical nuclear weapons ... The US plan, or “option”, to use nuclear weapons against Iran is ...
www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=10282 - 18k - Cached - Similar pages

The Raw Story | Senior intel official: Pentagon moves to second ...The Pentagon's top brass has moved into second-stage contingency planning ... An April New Yorker report by Sy Hersh alleged that the nuclear option was on ...
www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Pentagon_moves_to_secondstage_planning_for_0921.html - 21k - Cached - Similar pages

Nuclear option creep | csmonitor.comEven the leaked version of the Pentagon's "nuclear posture review," which was ... But, in considering a preemptive nuclear strike against Iraq as an option, ...
www.csmonitor.com/2003/0210/p09s01-coop.html - 61k - Jul 15, 2007 - Cached - Similar pages

Asia Times Online :: Asian News, Business and Economy.The Pentagon's nuclear wish By Jim Lobe .... are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option," he wrote. ...
www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/GI14Aa01.html - 38k - Cached - Similar pages

Deep BackgroundThe Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney’s ... and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. ...
www.amconmag.com/2005_08_01/article3.html - 24k - Cached - Similar pages

The US Nuclear Option and the "War on Terrorism"In a classified Pentagon document (Nuclear Posture Review) presented to the US .... In the wake of September 11, 2001, the nuclear option is intimately ...
www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO405A.html - 29k - Cached - Similar pages

The Nuclear Option in Iraq - Global Policy Forum - UN Security CouncilFirst, the Pentagon's nuclear posture review, signed by Rumsfeld in ... removing the firewall and adding nuclear weapons to the normal option ladder makes ...
www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/consequences/2003/0126nuclear.htm - 20k - Cached - Similar pages

[Mnemosyne]

43. Those are totally chilling search results, G_j.

I don't believe that most average American people have the clarity to scream soon enough to end the neocons insane plans. But try to pre-empt 'American Idol' or sports; and they suddenly find their voices.

I remain mystified, and deeply saddened, by the fact that more people vote for AI than in the elections. Who could have imagined a country where such a thing is the norm? Who could have imagined, having enough completely ignorant jackass representatives, that 97 in the Senate would have the gall to vote to attack another country that has done us no harm?

My soul weeps for what our country has become; but weeps hardest for what our country will end up becoming.

Peace,
v

[AndyTiedye]

47. If We All Screamed At Once, Cheney Wouldn't Hear Us From His "Undisclosed Location"

And if he could hear us, would it make any difference?

[0007]

9. With out a fucking doubt!! nt

[frebrd]

10. To all of the above: ABSOLUTELY! n/t

[AndyTiedye]

11. I Am Coming To Realize That Threat May be Why They Do NOT Impeach

They impeach, Bush** declares martial law. GAME OVER.

[kimmerspixelated]

40. I've often wondered that as well.

They are much worse than any mafiosos, definitely capable of anything and they are becoming more and more cornered. Hopefully, we can render them completely powerless b4 it's too late!

[Mnemosyne]

52. Excellent point AndyT. Maybe this is why the

dems were allowed the majority last Nov. It actually would make more sense than many things have since Jan. 2001.

[liberal N proud]

12. They have all the toys

All they need to do is enter the zip code and press the button...:nuke:











Maybe that is what they are threatening everyone in Congress with to get what they desire, control

[Red Zelda]

13. I really don't think they have the balls.

[icymist]

18. Really? Why do you think that, may I ask?

eom

[Red Zelda]

31. They are not THAT deranged.

A offensive nuke strike? That's as likely as a Kucinich presidency.

[demnan]

14. Yes

We must act soon.

[daninthemoon]

15. Two things would prompt them. One would be if it somehow

benefitted Haliburton stocks. The other would be if they thought it would bring about Armageddon. Hell yes they would.

[kimmerspixelated]

42. God, what a sick, sick world

they have created for themselves!

[Double T]

16. The two idiots are desperate, crazy bastards and capable of............

everything. I believe BOTH would love nothing more than to start world war III, then declare martial law and proclaim themselves dictators for life.

[MrMickeysMom]

17. Yep (could poll this one)

[cboy4]

19. Yes....they would try to downplay it by saying they're "only"

bunker buster tactical nukes, and they were necessary to wipe out everything underground.

Not harm anyone. :eyes:

I know that lunatic Duncan Hunter can't wait to use them, as he hinted during the debate.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/06/05/gop-debate-iii-iran-preemptive-war-and-nukes/

[AntiFascist]

65. That was my thought...the media might not even report them as nuclear n/t

[rubberducky]

20. Without any doubt.

They will do anything to hang onto power. Do they intend to hand over to dems all the power they have accumulated?? Not unless it is a "dem" they can trust to use in the best interest of the ruling party.

[barbtries]

21. i think they dream of it

seriously, i put nothing, nothing at all, past these motherfuckers. i don't even think they are sane.

[C_U_L8R]

22. Yes but...

i think they would be out of power within minutes of pushing the button.

even better to toss em out before they push any buttons.

[Richard Steele]

23. B*sh couldn't launch a canoe. Cheney is capable of ANYTHING.

I don't think Cheney intends to allow the '08 election
that so many people have their hopes pinned on.

[Lerkfish]

24. absolutely, there is no moral line they would not cross.

[LSK]

25. Cheney is n/t

[pitohui]

26. they are capable of it but it's bad for bidness

about nuclear war i'm not too worried unless it's launched by the other side, reason, they're making billions doing war the slow old-fashioned way, it would cut into profits too much to have a big blast and it's all over in a day

trust me, w. these people it's all about the dollar bill

[EFerrari]

44. I agree. Nukes aren't as profitable as supplying troops. n/t

[madokie]

27. not only can they or will they they are setting the stage for doing just that

[bobthedrummer]

28. They are capable of doing anything with what they have access to-k&r

[mzmolly]

29. Could impeachment spurn such an action?

That asked, I support impeachment.

[valerief]

32. Well, many people believe they orchestrated 9-11, so, yes, they are.

The question is: against whom? Us?

[nebenaube]

38. probably.... n/t

[coco77]

33. Yes!

yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yyes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,es,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,

yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,yes,Most Definitely!

[no_hypocrisy]

34. F*CK YES!

That's more of a rhetorical statement than a question.

[blues90]

35. Absolutely !

I believe they are capable of anything . I also feel this may be one reason that impeachment is off the table . Perhaps the Dems know this may happen if the admin is forced into a corner , it may happen either way so to prevent this we have to chance impeachment at all costs .

[coco77]

36. Because they know that these people are...

nuttier than some fruitcakes.

[Karenina]

37. These guys have displayed such a woody

to blow up their stockpile, anyone doubting their goal of ejaculation needs to seek therapy for DENIAL.

[Swamp Rat]

46. LIEBLING!!!

:loveya: :loveya: :loveya:

[Karenina]

50. Nee-noo! I JUST saved the orig of that shot!

Now I got PERFECT balloon captions. :yourock:

:loveya: :loveya: :loveya:

[Swamp Rat]

51. check your pm

;)

[leftofthedial]

39. undoubtedly

they are amoral sociopaths

they would do ANYTHING to gain and keep power

[KAT119]

41. Totally planning it w/ Israel as we type!!!

[Behind the Aegis]

66. A nuclear strike? I doubt it. You have proof to substantiate your accusation?

[Vincardog]

45. They are; they have, and they have wet dreams about it still BUT

nothing not even the torture pictures from Abu Graib gets them as hard as the thought of nuking Iran and starting the permanent war of their dreams.

[spanone]

48. Absolutely. Without a Doubt. With God on Their Side. Fucking A.

[bamacrat]

49. I believe that this administration will do anything they feel is necessary.

I'm still on the fence about what will happen in 2008 but I do think BushCo. could do any of the things you listed. Or hell maybe all of them, going from last to first in the list. But definitely the need to be gone.

[DearAbby]

53. You have kept the powder dry...

Let's use it!

[tom_paine]

54. Yes, they could do all these things and will sleep deeply and pleasantly

They are monsters and the only question remaining is to what depths their depravity sinks.

[and-justice-for-all]

55. They are that insane and evil..

..that why they have to removed ASAP!

[tblue37]

57. Yes, I do. (eom)

[LearnedHand]

58. HELL yes!

Furthermore, I think they probably discuss using the bomb against our own country every single day. You know, something like the situation in "V for Victory," where the "government" uses the weapon against its own country and then blames the terrorists.

[defendandprotect]

59. YEAH . . . !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[WritersBlock]

60. Yes. I would put nothing past these murderous traitors. n/t

[G_j]

61. evidence of high crimes is already there

and more to be found

of course you can't Impeach on something someone may do in the future.
There is more than enough Constitutional mandate to Impeach now.


Hopefully preventing a nuclear attack or another 9-11 would be a fringe benefit of Impeachment, I suppose! :sarcasm:

[BeHereNow]

62. There you go AGAIN-

Trick question, eh?
Fuck yes.
Count on it.
And the dems will light the fuse.

BHN

[G_j]

63. just the way

my mind works I guess!

:hi: :hug:

[Swamp Rat]

64. capable?

[althecat]

67. .. someone sent me this by email today....

You know what scares me..
 
As Paul Craig Roberts (apparently former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration) puts it:
 
http://www.vdare.com/roberts/070715_impeach.htm
" Bush has put in place all the necessary measures for dictatorship in the form of "executive orders" that are triggered whenever Bush declares a national emergency. Recent statements by Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff, former Republican senator Rick Santorum and others suggest that Americans might expect a series of staged, or false flag, "terrorist" events in the near future. "

 
Way I see it, the only way they'd get away with actually nuking Iran (as they seem to want to do) is if there was a nuclear explosion on US territory.
 
I'm sure there are folks hoping to go into Iran using entirely remote planes, with no possible risk to pilots..
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070715/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_air_surge_ii_2
 
Nukes and robot planes, an air force generals wet dream. 
 
However, I do believe that "wiser" heads will prevail.
 
Its interesting that the Joint Chiefs allegedly went almost to the point of revolt over an order to deploy another carrier to Iran. (As Chalmers Johnson put it in a very interesting podcast interview - http://www.electricpolitics.com/podcast/2007/06/the_fallacy_of_full_spectrum_d.html - it was practically a(nother) constitutional crisis. Can't a good direct link to this but Seymour Hersh also writes about Joint Chief opposition to the insanity of the inner junta: http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/08/hersh-joint-chiefs-opposed-to-iran-nuke-attack-members-of-congress-gung-ho/  
 
It seems insane to hope for wiser heads from the blood thirsty nutcases in the pentagon, but just as the higher level german generals that had initially supported the Nazis and planned their bleitzkrieg eventually turned on Hitler and his inner junta I believe there is probably a mood of turning on this madman (these madmen). As with the German generals in 1947 its not because they don't believe in the politics, but rather because they can see how damaging the policies and strategies of a madman can be to their beloved army. (The US Army is really hurting in Iraq and they know they cannot afford another front).
 
I'd suspect that there are folks at the highest levels who were "on the out" for 9/11 (which would be 99% of them presumably) that are now working hard to stop any type of terrorist attack, whether it be false flag or 'real' flag terrorism.
 
For instance this fascinating story: "German surveillance stopped a team of "US security men" attempting to smuggle C4 plastic explosives past a checkpoint at Heiligendamm." http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2007/100607g8falseflag.htm 
 
It may well be that with all the hype about stopping terrorism things have got to the point where its just not possible to pull off the dramatic (and believable) false flag operation that Bush would need to put in place any of the apparatus of the 'unitary executive' they've put in place (even if it were in fact true that thats what they have in mind).
 
Here's hoping anyway. If they want to stay in power (which I'm sure they do) I'm sure it seems  much easier to pull off a stolen election (and a plausible excuse) than a descent into direct totalitarianism. Of course even a stolen election is going to need a decent excuse - something that americans could maybe believe as a reasonable cause for the kind of massive swing required to get back into power. (I'm still waiting for Condi to throw her hat in the ring by the way ;_)

[timtom]

68. Are you kidding?

We are playing poker in a Las Vegas casino. Could it be rigged?

[OneBlueSky]

69. not only capable, but eager . . . what good are toys that you can't play with? . . . n/t

.

[indepat]

70. Do you think the sun always rises in the east?

[GoddessOfGuinness]

71. Yes.

And yes, impeachment is an absolute necessity.

[bigwillq]

72. Without a doubt

:scared:

[Zywiec]

73. I think any president is capable of launching a nuclear strike

that's why they have someone with them at all time carrying the codes.

[daninthemoon]

74. I almost forgot. They already launched a nuclear strike in Iraq.

All those armor piercing rounds are coated in depleted URANIUM. The body count from that is only beginning. Then again, who's counting?

[bobthedrummer]

75. .

[BeHereNow]

76. There you go AGAIN- ANOTHER trick question...

But of course.
That is the plan,
Now if they could only completely obliterate
all public consensus on the matter-
Oh WAIT!
They already have!
Buckle up kids.
Now the REAL fun awaits us as the train
hurls off the tracks into the pit of hell.

BHN

[proud patriot]

77. Impeach Now

[snappyturtle]

78. See this excellent post by David Swanson.....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3392226

edit: Conyers--three more congress members and I'll impeach (with or without Pelosi)

[NativeTexan]

79. OH HELL YEAH!!!

And I was RELIEVED that Cheney didn't do so Saturday Morning!!!