Lieberman favors military strike on Iran

Yahoo ^

[Sub-Driver]

Lieberman favors military strike on Iran

10 minutes ago

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (news, bio, voting record) said Sunday the United States should consider a military strike against Iran because of Tehran's involvement in Iraq.

"I think we've got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in Iraq," Lieberman said. "And to me, that would include a strike over the border into Iran, where we have good evidence that they have a base at which they are training these people coming back into Iraq to kill our soldiers."

The U.S. accuses Iran of fostering terrorism and Tehran's nuclear ambitions have brought about international reproach.

Lieberman, the Democratic nominee for vice president in 2000 who now represents Connecticut as an independent, spoke of Iranians' role in the continued violence in Iraq.

"By some estimates, they have killed as many as 200 American soldiers," he said. "Well, we can tell them we want them to stop that. But if there's any hope of the Iranians living according to the international rule of law and stopping, for instance, their nuclear weapons development, we can't just talk to them.

"If they don't play by the rules, we've got to use our force, and to me, that would include taking military action to stop them from doing what they're doing."

Lieberman said much of the action could probably be done by air, although he would leave the strategy to the generals in charge

[semaj]

Maybe he should run for president.

[hunter112]

Lieberman is the last voice of common sense left in the Democrat party.

Lieberman is a one-issue politician. He wants the US military to do whatever it can for Israel, at any time, anywhere, no matter whether or not the time is right to move for the checkmate.

I despise muzzies, too, but I recognize there are other considerations in fighting them around the world. Joementum has this as the be-all and end-all of his foreign policy. Get rid of islamunism (a worthy goal) and Joe would be as dovish as his fellow socialists.

[kidd]

Precisely.

Remeber folks, Lieberman was completely FOR the shamnesty bill. And if he is not serious about increasing border security significantly, then he is misinformed on how to proceed with the WOT.

[operation clinton cleanup]

Lieberman is a one-issue politician. He wants the US military to do whatever it can for Israel, at any time, anywhere, no matter whether or not the time is right to move for the checkmate.

True, but the military option must be kept on the table in a credible fashion, not just words like the rest of the Democrats seem to be in favor of.

[docbnj]

Then we should not be publishing that, either.

So, I stand corrected, and will let Lieberman off this time. But will you agree that we should not publicize our intelligence so widely? I would make photos of a potential target public only when we can show “before” and “after” pictures.

There are times when we want the enemy to be in doubt. Even when they are in places unknown to us, we wish them to have doubts about their concealment.

[SeaHawkFan]

I could handle a Thompson-Leiberman ticket.

[hunter112]

I agree that the military options must always be kept on the table, but I just wanted some sanity on the “Joe is our friend” sort of blather on this thread. He’s NOT our friend, he is just the enemy of our enemy, currently. He’d never lift a finger to save Taiwan from the ChiComs, or do anything to tick off Putin, unless the Ruskies were talking about arming Israel’s neighbors.

[Memphis Moe]

Joe, don’t expect any support from the neutered Bush administration.

[operation clinton cleanup]

I would never vote for JL, he made an @ss of himself in the 2000 election, but I will give him credit for recognizing the threat we face. The idea proposed by Bill Krystol to make him SecDef is idiotic!

[elhombrelibre]

I wonder often if some of the Republicans understand the stakes, and I certainly wonder about Europe and Russia.

[Congressman Billybob]

Joe cannot caucus with the Republicans. His only remaining political goal is to stay in the Senate. He can do that as a Democrat, or independent. But if he actually became a Republican, he could be defeated in the Nutmeg State.

Self-preservation being his goal, switching to the Republican side is out. He's not like Zell Miller who had the idea of being a Democrat boiled into his bones from age six, and is too old to change that.

As for the comment right after yours, about "trusting" Joe, I no longer trust him either. Unless I can see an obvious political motive in what he's doing, I don't trust him to carry it out. That's why I used the phrase, "former friend."

John / Billybob

[hunter112]

He only recognizes this threat, none of the other ones. And you're right, the Kristol idea is insane, but he suffers from the same myopia as Lieberman. You can add Mort Zuckerman to that list, as well.

As long as it's Americans risking life, buying guns and bombs, and taking political heat from the rest of the world on behalf of Israel, they're in favor of it. When it comes to our other significant interests, they're as weeniefied as George McGovern.

[oregon conservative]

Leiberman only talks tough because he knows no one will do it- imho

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

"Hearts and minds" bullsh/t.

Grab'em by the b@lls and their "hearts and minds" will follow!

Regards,
GtG

[drhogan]

that’s a real good idea!

[txhurl]

Now if only the Joos would vote for him!

[Marine_Uncle]

On national defense and Islam verse the rest of the world Joe is mostly on our side. Perhaps the message was meant as a signal.

[blasater1960]

I cant believe it took a Democrat to say it out loud. Where are all the GOP? gutless, spineless, useless.

Note to GOP: You had better get your crap together and fast.