The peace loving American people should
never vote for any candidate PROMISING WAR WITH IRAN. Newt especially is very
open and proud of his unconditional loyalty to Israel declaring not obviously
through ignorance that Palestinians are invented people but a comic if not
clownish entertainment to make his Zionists masters smile if not laugh for a
penny on his campaign bag. Anything for money especially for the US presidency
exerts a despicable corrupting influence that doesn’t only tramples upon the
ideals of democracy; it turns democracy into a laughable ideology.
Imagine the consequences of a war with Iran
that may lead to WORLD WAR III
Newt Gingrich’s Deep Neocon Ties Drive His
Bellicose Middle East Policy
by
Wayne Barrett Jan 30, 2012 4:45 AM EST
If
elected, Gingrich would be the first American president to emerge from the dark
think-tank world born in the Reagan era that gave us the Iraq war and lusts now
for an Iranian reprise. The Daily Beast closely examines Gingrich’s long-time
association with this discredited group.
SNIP
If elected, Gingrich would be the first
American president to emerge from the dark think-tank world born in the Reagan
era that gave us the Iraq War and lusts now for an Iranian reprise. A Likudnik
version of the Manchurian candidate, Newt has spent much of his post-Congress
life in the grasp of warrior colonies like theAmerican
Enterprise Institute (AEI), the think tank where he
became a senior fellow two months after he stepped down as speaker in 1999,
remained until he declared for president last May, and worked at times
alongside Dick and Lynne Cheney, Richard Perle, John Bolton, Michael Ledeen,
and Paul Wolfowitz, the first Bush battalion to euphemistically land in
Baghdad, self-dispatched well before 9/11.
SNIP
As early as October 15, 2001, four days before
the Afghanistan ground war began, Gingrich was already writing that “defeating
the Taleban (sic) without defeating Saddam is like defeating imperial Japan and
leaving the Nazis alone.” That November, he
helped lay the WMD groundwork for an Iraq invasion, claiming he’d personally
talked to a defector who’d headed the Iraq nuclear program and that this
unimpeachable source told him “there
were 7,000 people working on nuclear weapons in Iraq.” Gingrich
concluded that “any reasonable person would have to come to the conclusion”
that Saddam “intends to use them the first chance he gets.” This is, said the
sage who now makes the same speech about Iran, “Hitler in 1935.” In 2002, his Washington
Times op-ed
opposed U.N. inspections of WMD facilities, insisting that the case had already
been so well established that “every day spent waiting” while inspections
proceeded would be “another day for Saddam to expand” his WMD program.
SNIP
Gingrich’s views on Iran in the campaign
are a reiteration of positions Wurmser took as far back as 2007, and are
reminiscent of his Iraq advice. Limited strikes against Iranian nuclear targets
would be useless, Wurmser said then and Gingrich says now. “Only if what we do
is placed in the framework of a fundamental assault on the survival of the
regime,” Wurmser declared, “will
it have a pick-up among ordinary Iranians. If we start shooting, we must be
prepared to fire the last shot. Don’t shoot a bear if you’re not going to kill
it.” So, if this is the Iraq sequel Adelson’s seed money would fund
in a Gingrich administration, Wurmser is supplying the script.
Since
the WMD language about Iran now used by Gingrich and his neocon allies is
almost identical to war whoops that took us into Iraq, why should we listen to
the same seers?
FULL
ARTICLE:
No comments:
Post a Comment