Then again, maybe it's all just bullshit?

When have they been right about anything?

Anything!

Wasn't it Albert Einstein who defined insantiy as doing the same thing and expecting a different result?

Shouldn't there be a mechanism to revoke the voting privileges of anyone who still takes these guys seriously?

This administration always and only lies. Besides there is a large, moderate population in Iran and these people may be on the verge of taking charge of their government. If we bomb or invade or do anything to Iran right now all these sensible moderates (who like Americans but don't like this government) will become our enemies. This may be just what the bushies want..more excuses to make money for the MIC..but it would be unwise for everyone but the weapons makers and oil industry (and the politicians beholden to their money).

Throughout our storied history when it was in our "better interests" we supplied more than arms, we supplied or backed "leaders" to such wonderful places like Viet Nam, Nicaragua , Hatii, Philippines, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan (read: the CIA arming of bin Laden)and a host of other smaller nations knowing that such placements would "enhance" our ability to induce our will onto their citizens. Before there was this Haliburton there had to be many Haliburton-like companies that benefited greatly from our helpful form of Imperialism.

Why is everyone so shocked that Iran is jockying for a better position when this morass terminates. Bush's incompetence in carrying out his glorious plan to democracize the Middle East has resulted in this hugely unwanted result. Heck of a job George...

First the White House tried the anonymous military officials, then Tony Snow, then finally the President decided he had to have a press conference about the Iranians supplying these weapons. We're so busy discussing their lack of credibility rather than SCREAMING at them : THEN TALK TO IRAN ABOUT IT ABOUT! Clearly the whole game by WH is to Prepare Us For War With Iran. I don't want to prepare for war. I want our leaders to TALK TO IRAN - WORK THIS OUT DIPLOMATICALLY. I have called all the members of my congressional delegation to say the same thing and I suggest you do to. Stop talking about credibilty, and tell them to start talking.

It looks like Gen. Peter Pace couldn't be "re-educated" into parroting the administration's line of bullshit, so they backed off of their "certainty" that the "head leaders" of Iran were giving orders to kill Americans. Maybe Pace remembered another Gen., a former head of the JCoS named Colin Powell who now lives in quiet ignominy for not speaking what he knew to be the truth.

Once again everyone is letting President Cheneybush frame the question on disputed matters. This time it is whether the Iranian government or renegades within it are providing the weapons in Iraq that are killing our troops; that these weapons are coming from Iran in significant numbers is allowed to be a given.

The real questions should be how truthful President Cheneybush is about the Iranian weapons being a significant factor, and if not coming from Iran who is really supplying them.

It doesn't seem logical for Iran to be providing them. It is a Shiite theocracy, generally supportive of the Iraqi Shiahs. The Iraqi Shiahs -- -- so far -- have not been a major force behind our troop deaths; they have been busily killing off Sunnis, the same Sunnis that with their al Qaeda and other allies have caused the most mayhem to our troops.

Would Iran be arming its mortal enemies, the Sunnis? It is far more likely that the Sunnis are being aided by our Sunni "friends" from other countries, in particular Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

But Cheneybush can't blame the Saudis, because we are still dependent on their oil. And we need the Egyptian government for other geopolitical reasons. Iran is their perfect whipping boy.

Twenty years or so ago, the leaders of the United States, including Donald Rumsfeld, provided weapons to Saddam Hussein to kill Iranians in a proxy war. And now we are accusing the Iranian leaders of doing the same thing by providing Iraqis with weapons to kill Americans in a proxy war.

What comes around goes around.

We are being told in the media that Iran is sending weapons to stir up trouble in Iraq. This is not true.

Fact #1 - Iran is 'Shiite'. The current majority in Iraq which was opposed to Saddam is 'Shiite'.

It is not in the interest of Iran to cause the Shiite dominated government of Iraq to fall. Iran is very happy that the US got rid of their opponent Saddam Hussein.

Iran and Iraq fought a war for eight years that killed hundreds of thousands of people, ending in a stalemate. To quote one source:

"No one is sure of the total casualties during the Iran-Iraq war, but estimates range from 500,000 to 1 million dead, 1-2 million wounded, and more than 80,000 prisoners. There were approximately 2.5 million refugees, and whole cities were destroyed. The financial cost is estimated at a minimum of $200 billion."

Fact #2 - Saudi Arabia is 'Sunni'. Saddam was 'Sunni'. Iraq's old government (see war above) was Sunni. The people in Iraq that the US calls the 'insurgents' (ones who miss Saddam) are Sunni. It is not in the interest of Saudi Arabia and the religiously liberal Sunnis to see the religiously conservative Shiites (the ones who parade through the streets whipping themselves on the backs) gain more control in Iraq.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2003/04/23/MN296904.DTL&o=2

Question: So, who is providing weapons to the 'insurgents' in Iraq? Would the Iranians really give money and weapons to their mortal enemies?

No. Here is the real truth:

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/index.php?menuID=1&subID=1147

If the American people fall for the line that Iran is trying to undermine the Shiite led government in Iraq, so that the US Administration can justify another war in the middle east, look out.

If Iraq could not overwhelm Iran after 8 years and hundreds of thousands of lives, why does Bush think that the US can?