Will we fall for war with Iran?

[Towntalk]

Answer 1 ...No.

Answer 2 ...When you keep within the theam of the Mahoning Valley or for that matter Ohio then I will reply.

As for local soldiers being killed in Iraq, our valley has already gone through that.

No one has an exclusive hold on being against the war. Lies got us in, but the Green Party is sure not going to get us out, an for one very simple reason, the Green Party, for all it's propaganda is a fly speck on an overripe watermelon in the grand scheme of things. You know very well that your party will not have anyone in Congress, and you also should know that unless you have people at the table, your party's opinions mean absolutely nothing.

And where is all of the media attention? Not on the Green Party.

Who for example in the Green Party is running for President?

What Green Party member is running for Congress from our district? (The Mahoning Valley as a whole has 3 seats in Congress. 14th, 16th, and 17th)

[irishbobcat]

Towntalk......do you pay the bills for this site??

And when local boys start to die in another illegal invasion of Iran like Iraq...will it then be a LOCAL ISSUE?

So why don't you quit wasting band space by repling to my posts???

Who died and made you KING TOWNTALK?  With all your hot air no wonder we have a global warming problem.....

[Towntalk]

I was under the impression that this board was for L-O-C-A-L politics and not wasting bandwidth posting full text articles from obscure sources, but then folks like Irishbobcat seems to think that because he's not paying the bills for this web site that he can abuse the privileges granted to us by the site owners. Or is it that he doesn't no how to simply post links?

Free speech is a privilege, but when your doing it on other people's dime it's abuse. Why don't you simply build your own web site where you can post articles to your hearts content, I'm sure that there would be a few local folks that would visit it and be in awe of your wealth of knowledge.

By the way, a great point was made today about Nancy Pelosi's visit to Youngstown. Why wasn't she shown those places that are hard hit, the companies that are laying off workers and moving out of the country?

Is Congressman Ryan having doubts about next years election that he has to bring in the Speaker of the House?

[sfc_oliver]

     OK so we are still claiming stolen elections, yet we have a Demacrat congress who investigated everything they thought had any hope of embarassing the white house and still has nothing against the President that they could use. So when will they get to work and get the spending bills done?
     And war with iran? Didn't they attack US in 79? Have they not been our sworn enemy since then? We did little more than cut off diplomatic ties with them. And even Hillary does not rule out military force against Iran. Does anyone want war with Iran? NO, No, and No.
     When a printed article is this full of half truths and unproven accusations it is difficult to put any credibility on any part of it.

[irishbobcat]

Published on Wednesday, October 17, 2007 by the Chicago Sun-Times
Will We Fall For War Vs. Iran?
by Andrew Greeley
It would appear, according to news reports, that the hard-liners in the Bush administration, led by the vice president, are pushing for a war with Iran. The tactics are the same. Once you've played the fear card to start one war, the second time is easier.

Iran is a threat to American security and freedom. They are trying to build nuclear bombs to use against us. They are already killing Americans in Iraq. They hate us and our freedom. Eliminating the Iranian government and destroying its nuclear facilities is essential to the security of the United States and part of the international war on terror.

Will the shell game work again? I would like to think that it would not, that the American people will not be won over by "war on terror" propaganda, that Congress would not be taken in this time (not even Sen. Hillary Clinton), and that the national media would raise a loud hue and cry against yet another "preemptive war."

Yet surely the hawks would shout once again that in a "national security emergency" the commander in chief has the power to go to war without authorization from Congress. The president might argue that Gen. David Petraeus approved the attack. Indeed, those on the dark side could even suggest that a presidential election could be "postponed" until the Iranian crisis is over — and like the Iraq crisis, that might be never.

Once you have stolen one and maybe two presidential elections, it's relatively easy to steal a third, especially as part of the "global war on terror" and a "national security emergency."

A year ago, I would not have suspected that such a scenario could possibly be taken seriously. I'm not so sure anymore. The claims made for the almost unlimited power of the commander in chief seem to make anything, however bizarre, possible. Despite intense national opposition to the war in Iraq, there are enough "patriotic" cement heads in the country to provide support for such a project.

Cries like "nuke the Iranians before they nuke us" would be heard in the land. It might tip the national election to a Republican candidate — perhaps the 9/11 candidate from New York City — and to a majority of Republicans in Congress.

The president could even hint that such a war was "the right thing to do," a conclusion he had reached after a long conversation with God.

There is precious little that those who are opposed to such a war could do. The president, his vice president could assert, is the commander in chief. He has the inherent power to start a war if he deems it necessary for the security of the country. The National Security Council could eavesdrop on opponents to the war, and the FBI could turn up with "national security letters" to probe into the lives of these "security risks." The pliant Supreme Court, having permitted the president to seize an election on the grounds of equal rights under the law, could easily phony up an argument that Justices Scalia and Thomas and their allies would support.

Perhaps the House could vote a bill of impeachment but there are not enough votes for conviction in the Senate. And the president could dismiss such an action as a violation of his powers as commander in chief.

Certainly Congress could pass a joint resolution now against such a war. But they would need half a dozen Republican senators to support it. That's not likely to happen. And the president could claim that he has the inherent power to ignore such a resolution.

When it comes to war in this administration, Dick Cheney always gets his way.

Andrew Greeley is a priest in good standing of the Archdiocese of Chicago. for 52 years, a columnist for 40 years, a sociologist for 45 years, a novelist for 28 years, distinguished lecturer at the University of Arizona for 28 , research associate at National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago for 46 years.