Neoconservative Republicans Would View A Victory By Iranian President Ahmadinejad’s Challenger, Reformer Mir Hossein Mousavi As A Victory For President Barack Hussein Obama And Peaceful Resolution To Iranian Nuclear Crisis
So, The Huffington Post is reporting this nail-biting from the Far-Right is a fact and is even going as far as to name names. Can we say “grotesque”? Just what IS the mindset of these demented fellow “human” beings who think nothing of putting party politics above the lives of their fellow Americans when it’s at least still SLIGHTLY possible to find a way to get along with the nation of Iran without a single shot being fired; a single bomb being dropped? To just picture a scenario of Dick Cheney, George Bush (both I and II) holding hands, praying for an Ahmadinejad victory over Mr. Mousavi is enough to evoke a gag reflex in me. GHOULS, anybody who would be dismayed at the thought of less M-16’s and M-16 rounds being manufactured; less bombers and fighters, missiles and bombs being built and sold at the possible expense of peace is enough for me to hope and PRAY karma ALWAYS works.
I wish for nothing but the very best in this Iranian presidential election for Mir Hossein Mousavi and should he win, I wish for nothing but peace between our two nations. Conversely, I wish for involuntary incarceration in mental facilities for those who do not.
***
Some important reactions by highly capable fellow bloggers: Andrew Sullivan of The Daily Dish brings attention to some highly possible voter fraud being conducted in Iran; Robert Foley of Lawyers, Guns and Money says don’t be surprised if there is rioting in the streets tonight in Tehran; Justin Gardner of Donklephant says his “gut” tells him we’ll be seeing a Mir Hossein Mousavi victory…
Loading ...
7:42 am on June 13th, 2009 1
It is the most inane and insane of propositions that we are “rooting” for Ahmadinejad. We’ve been trying to warn the world, and you folks on the left, about the dangers of Ahmadinejad and Iran. Heck, Ahmadinejad has been warning the world about the dangers of Ahmadinejad and Iran, but, y’all won’t listen.
The HuffPost, and, sorry to say, you, have escaped into Reality Based Community drug trips and kool aid. It really matters not which one wins. They are both dangerous, both want nuclear weapons, and both want Israel destroyed.
8:01 am on June 13th, 2009 2
Sorry GTL, I do agree with sir William…he “Teaches” well…
11:09 am on June 13th, 2009 3
Guns, all I can say is WTF????????? Have you started writing for something to the left Kos or HuPo?
Seriously, my friend, I’m starting to worry about you. You used to be, as your mast head says, left of center but right on target (within a click at least). The past month or so, looks like you have a “wandering zero” and can’t call your shots anymore. You seem to not just be left of center, but all the way off the paper a lot of the time.
Although you ARE right on target with this: ” I wish for nothing but the very best in this Iranian presidential election for Mir Hossein Mousavi and should he win, I wish for nothing but peace between our two nations. Conversely, I wish for involuntary incarceration in mental facilities for those who do not.”
And all the people said AMEN!
1:02 pm on June 13th, 2009 4
So, that would be for both Iranian candidates, who both want nuclear weapons and to destroy Israel, right?
2:16 pm on June 13th, 2009 5
Wow — my, oh my, my right-leaning brothers… looks like I touched a nerve, eh? I thought I was clearly attacking only those who were quoted in the ref’ed article who were clearly lamenting the possibility of an Ahmadinejad loss. I wouldn’t think and still don’t think this would apply to any of the present company?
1:02 pm on June 15th, 2009 6
Seems to me that the purpose of the HuffPo article was simply to inflame thoughtless left wing nutjobs. I didn’t see a careful analysis of what “neocons” really want to happen in the election. The quoted “neocon” seemed to me (- a guy who voted for neither BHO or JuanSidney) to be worried about a Mousavi election giving a false impression of huge progress, when in reality, we should be taking a cautious approach. I do agree that a Mousavi win would be a good thing overall, but I also agree with the others GTL – I think you failed to properly identify and locate your target here.
IMHO,
Steve
2:05 pm on June 15th, 2009 7
Ah, it wouldn’t be the first time I “missed”, Steve. I just truly, TRULY appreciate all of y’all’s comments — for or against my POV. That’s part of what makes this my very favorite blog
2:42 pm on June 15th, 2009 8
Even if it were true, which it isn’t, it would be no more appalling than the FACT that Pelosi, Reid, and their democRAT cronies undermined President Bush’s and the U.S. Military’s actions FOR YEARS in Iraq, simply because they did not want a U.S. victory during Bush’s administration.
The end results of the TREASONOUS actions of Pelosi, Reid, et. al. was a significant and needless increase in the number of deaths and casualties among U.S. military men and women, and a significant decrease in our capabilities to fight against the enemies of this nation.
Don’t forget, the democrats – including Obama – did exactly what you describe but they did it against President Bush and the American people who were fighting in Iraq.
Paybacks are hell.
3:00 pm on June 15th, 2009 9
FandB — you already know I’m not crazy about those congresscritters you’ve named above. That said, I’m a firm believer our troops WON the war once the ceasefire was lifted and the terms of UN Article 1441 was completed — once Saddam was handed over to the Iraqi people. The war was won right then and there as written and everything thereafter was about the oil as evidenced by a direct quote from Alan Greenspan.
I’m very glad to have been a small cog in the wheel of the WINNING of the Iraq war and a bit disdained to be a small cog in the wheel of occupation. Where was our ticker-tape parade for one of the swiftest wins over the world’s (formerly) 4th largest army? It should have happened a very long time ago and America should have allowed the U.N. to come in for Part II as they were quite interested in doing so
“Just one man’s opinion” – Michael Savage
5:26 pm on June 15th, 2009 10
I don’t necessarily agree that Iraq was all about oil. And I’m not sure Greenspan, though very successful at one time, is still in complete control of all his mental faculties. However, regardless of those issues, one question – maybe a very important question, needs to be considered very carefully:
What would the nation and the world be like today if the U.S. were not able to acquire enough oil for its needs, civilian and military???
8:43 pm on June 15th, 2009 11
Wrong. I want anyone but that nutjob back.
Ill take all the victories we can get get no matter whose in the White House.
8:45 pm on June 15th, 2009 12
What would the nation and the world be like today if the U.S. were not able to acquire enough oil for its needs, civilian and military???
Anarchy is coming. Just wait till the rednecks gotta drive a battery operated wheelchair to haul their shotguns around.
Its curtains time.