Professor Cole – in the quote you put forth and said you liked no where did Obama talk about the many Iraqi deaths and injuries, he was only referring to those of the Americans nor did he mention there was a civil war but a fight against an insurgency involving sectarianism and terrorism. Bush would have done the same thing and probably with a lot more pizzazz.
Nor did Obama, as I see it, pledge to draw down the troops in Afghanistan. Here’s what he said: “And, next July, we will begin a transition to Afghan responsibility. The pace of our troop reductions will be determined by conditions on the ground, and our support for Afghanistan will endure. But make no mistake: this transition will begin – because open-ended war serves neither our interests nor the Afghan people’s.” He said that’s a transition date and what we’ll do will depend on the “conditions on the ground.” Hardly is that withdrawing troops.
You also don’t mention that the plan to take the troops from Iraq was Bush’s.
Finally, Iraq is no more an independent nation now than it was right after we invaded. With our largest embassy in the world being stationed there with its own armies, and our 50,000 non-combat combat brigades stationed there, it is an American satrap.
You say: "(After a reactor is already working, bombing it would turn it into a dirty bomb and harm large numbers of civilians, which even Bolton isn’t yet in favor of)."
You should correct it to say: "(After a reactor is already working, bombing it would turn it into a dirty bomb and harm large numbers of civilians, which even Bolton isn’t yet in favor of, yet.)"
I read this on glenn greenwald site: "How about the Iranian Shahram Amiri? He was either a CIA agent or a CIA kidnap victim. Whatever he was, he is now back in Iran.
Now the CIA is trying to get him killed by the Iranians by alleging he has been an informant for them for many years and also alleging he was paid five million dollars. The CIA's sociopathic self-absorption makes them witting abettors in pushing the paranoid Iranian government into kill Amiri.
This all makes me believe he was kidnapped because if he had been cooperating for many years why would the CIA want him dead. If It kidnapped him, then by alleging he cooperated for many years the CIA covers its misdeed and makes Amiri looks like an American spy.
You see if he was a volunteer spy, the CIA would not out him because that would send a message to all who might be interested in spying for it that doing so will be an eventual death sentence if the person gets out of line. That seems like the most unlikely way to get informants.
I assume the CIA could not get Amiri on the Obama hit list so it is using the Iranians as its hit squad. Is no one else bothered that the CIA is attempting to have a person killed? Is no one else bothered assuming the CIA is telling the truth that Amiri was a voluntary informant and provided valuable information that the CIA in appreciation wants him killed?"
It seems to me the CIA would not be outing him if her were a double agent because it would serve no purpose. I go with the kidnapping deal and Amiri giving them some information but mostly false stuff which they started to catch on with causing him to flee. The proof will be watching to see what Iran does with him.
© 2025 All Rights Reserved
al-Maliki Declares Independence
Professor Cole – in the quote you put forth and said you liked no where did Obama talk about the many Iraqi deaths and injuries, he was only referring to those of the Americans nor did he mention there was a civil war but a fight against an insurgency involving sectarianism and terrorism. Bush would have done the same thing and probably with a lot more pizzazz.
Nor did Obama, as I see it, pledge to draw down the troops in Afghanistan. Here’s what he said: “And, next July, we will begin a transition to Afghan responsibility. The pace of our troop reductions will be determined by conditions on the ground, and our support for Afghanistan will endure. But make no mistake: this transition will begin – because open-ended war serves neither our interests nor the Afghan people’s.” He said that’s a transition date and what we’ll do will depend on the “conditions on the ground.” Hardly is that withdrawing troops.
You also don’t mention that the plan to take the troops from Iraq was Bush’s.
Finally, Iraq is no more an independent nation now than it was right after we invaded. With our largest embassy in the world being stationed there with its own armies, and our 50,000 non-combat combat brigades stationed there, it is an American satrap.
You say: "(After a reactor is already working, bombing it would turn it into a dirty bomb and harm large numbers of civilians, which even Bolton isn’t yet in favor of)."
You should correct it to say: "(After a reactor is already working, bombing it would turn it into a dirty bomb and harm large numbers of civilians, which even Bolton isn’t yet in favor of, yet.)"
I read this on glenn greenwald site: "How about the Iranian Shahram Amiri? He was either a CIA agent or a CIA kidnap victim. Whatever he was, he is now back in Iran.
Now the CIA is trying to get him killed by the Iranians by alleging he has been an informant for them for many years and also alleging he was paid five million dollars. The CIA's sociopathic self-absorption makes them witting abettors in pushing the paranoid Iranian government into kill Amiri.
This all makes me believe he was kidnapped because if he had been cooperating for many years why would the CIA want him dead. If It kidnapped him, then by alleging he cooperated for many years the CIA covers its misdeed and makes Amiri looks like an American spy.
You see if he was a volunteer spy, the CIA would not out him because that would send a message to all who might be interested in spying for it that doing so will be an eventual death sentence if the person gets out of line. That seems like the most unlikely way to get informants.
I assume the CIA could not get Amiri on the Obama hit list so it is using the Iranians as its hit squad. Is no one else bothered that the CIA is attempting to have a person killed? Is no one else bothered assuming the CIA is telling the truth that Amiri was a voluntary informant and provided valuable information that the CIA in appreciation wants him killed?"
It seems to me the CIA would not be outing him if her were a double agent because it would serve no purpose. I go with the kidnapping deal and Amiri giving them some information but mostly false stuff which they started to catch on with causing him to flee. The proof will be watching to see what Iran does with him.