More talk of a (Cheney version of an) Iran strike
Somebody really wants this out there right now,
This is sourced to an anonymous "US defense official" and reinforced by Ehud Barak. (Better quoted in the JPost.)
Deconstruct this a little bit, and I find myself coming back to the Steve Clemons report from May that Cheney was working with the Israelis to "end run" US foreign policy by getting the Israelis to conduct a small strike, dragging the US into a larger conflict. (That would be treason, right?)
A claim by President Ahmadinejad that Iran has 3,000 working uranium-enriching centrifuges sent a tremor across the world yesterday amid fears that Israel would respond by bombing the country’s nuclear facilities.
Military sources in Washington said that the existence of such a large number could be a “tipping point”, triggering an Israeli air strike. The Pentagon is reluctant to take military action against Iran, but officials say that Israel is a “different matter”.
This is sourced to an anonymous "US defense official" and reinforced by Ehud Barak. (Better quoted in the JPost.)
Deconstruct this a little bit, and I find myself coming back to the Steve Clemons report from May that Cheney was working with the Israelis to "end run" US foreign policy by getting the Israelis to conduct a small strike, dragging the US into a larger conflict. (That would be treason, right?)
posted by mikevotes at
5:54 AM
2 Comments:
"(That would be treason, right?)"
No. Treason has been redefined as working against the Bush/Cheney regime, not the Constitution (which is on hiatus)
There is no treason, save opposing GWB.
By
-epm, at 10:18 AM
Right. I know.
I'm just amazed that there is such frequent and open discussion of Cheney and his minions "undermining" policy set forth by the POTUS, and this example is particularly extreme because it involves collusion with a foreign government.
Collusion with a foreign government to attempt to start a war against the president's explicit policy.
By
mikevotes, at 1:38 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home