The Danger of Silence
Submitted by Wes Clark on March 7, 2007 - 3:22pm.
stopiranwar.com | VoteVets | Call to Action | Iran | Iraq
What will war with Iran be like and how will it impact the troops in Iraq?
Silence.
That is what worries me. With every passing day that the administration won't talk to Iran, we come closer to an Iranian nuclear weapon, and the time at which the decision must be made whether or not the administration will use its military option.
In today's video blog, Jon Soltz, chairman of VoteVets.org, and I discuss the serious consequences of using military force against Iran--the impact on our men and women in uniform, U.S. influence in the region, and the stability of the Middle East.
The Bush Administration may refuse to have direct talks with Iran, but we cannot remain silent.
An attack on Iran will put additional strain on our already overextended military. It could well affect the United States' ability to extricate our forces from Iraq, as our troops will likely face even more attacks on the ground. And there will be potential for hostilities on American embassies abroad, a hike in oil prices, and an increased likelihood of terrorist attacks wherever Hizballah has active cells. You just don't know, and quite frankly, I don't want us to find out.
I need you to stand with me today.
Make your voice heard. Tell George W. Bush war with Iran is not the answer. Visit StopIranWar.com and sign the petition today!
Then be sure to watch our latest video blog.
Your efforts are having an impact. The media is starting to pay attention. Democratic leaders in Washington are starting to act. But we can't rest now. We cannot remain silent.
this or showing even close to the same level of concern about it that Gen. Clark is!
I would like to see this message especially forwarded on to the "media pundits" like Chris Matthews who are absolutely scared to death right now about Bush going to war with Iran and are looking to so-called Democratic "rock stars" and "media darlings" for the answers that they do NOT have and that Gen. Clark clearly has:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/10942
MEDIA PUNDITS: What they get right, wrong, questions for them, & Clark coverage!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 6, 2007 - 2:57pm.
Just look at how worried that Chris Matthews is now about Bush going to war with Iran:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16596292/
'Hardball with Chris Matthews' for Jan. 11
Read the transcript to the Thursday show
Guests: Gordon Smith, Tony Snow, Chris Dodd, Richard Haass, Mike Huckabee
MATTHEWS: Tony, will the president ask Congress‘ approval before any attack on Iran?
TONY SNOW, WHITE PRESS SECRETARY: You‘re getting way ahead of yourself, Chris. Nobody here is talking about attacks on Iran.
What the president was talking about is the movement of money and personnel and weaponry across the Iranian border into Iraq, where they‘re being used to kill Americans and also Iraqis. And what he‘s doing is making the sensible military point, which is you cut off the supply lines, you go after the people who have been supplying—carrying those supplies into Baghdad and elsewhere.
We‘re also thinking about the same thing with Syria, which is cutting off the so-called ratlines between the Syrian border and Anbar province.
So I tell anybody who‘s sitting around worrying about wars with Iran, there‘s more than one way to work on getting a nation to behave. For instance, you look at North Korea, we worked with—you know, worked with the Six Party Talks. With Iran, we have worked with the United Nations Security Council to try to send a message to the Iranian government.
Right now we are working on success in Iraq. And part of that success is making sure that individuals who are killing and funding and also weapons, including some pretty advanced weapons, don‘t get into Baghdad, where they can kill our fellow citizens.
MATTHEWS: Well, he did say we‘re going to disrupt the attacks on our forces, we will interrupt the flow of support from Iran. Does that mean stopping at the Iranian border or going into Iran?
SNOW: Well, again, I think what the president is talking about is the war in Iraq, Chris.
MATTHEWS: So he will seek congressional approval before any action against Iran?
SNOW: You are talking about something we‘re not even discussing...
MATTHEWS: Well, you are, Tony, because—look at this.
“I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region.”
Isn‘t that about Iran?
SNOW: It‘s about—yes, it is, in part. And what it is, is it‘s saying, “Look, we are going to make sure that anybody who tries to take aggressive action...”
But when Bill Clinton sent a carrier task force into the South China Sea after the North Koreans fired a missile over Japan, that was not as a prelude to war against North Korea. You know how it works.
MATTHEWS: No, I‘m just concerned because very much in the years and months building up to this war in Iraq, we heard kind of a drumbeat of the dangers from Iraq and the nuclear weaponry and what we‘re going to do about it. And then gradually we went to wore war.
And I‘m just wondering—we‘re looking here at the precursor for a rationale for an attack of some kind on—you say—I‘ll take it at your word—if the president‘s not going to attack Iran, we‘ll move on.
SNOW: OK. But let me do just a couple of things here.
I think you understand and most Americans understand Iran is the foremost financier here of global terror. It‘s a problem. But you don‘t deal with everything militarily, as you know. The United States exhausted all diplomatic options before going into Iraq.
I think what you‘re doing is you‘re trying to go down a road of speculation that is just way ahead of events. Right now, we‘re working on making Iraq a success.
One other thing about Iran, Chris. The Iranian public, most which of is young, is very pro-American. We got a lot of people who...
MATTHEWS: Boy, do I agree with you on that. Completely agree with that today.
My concern is we‘re going to see a ginning-up situation whereby we follow in hot pursuit any efforts by the Iranians to interfere with Iraq. We take a couple shots at them, they react. Then we bomb the hell out of them and hit their nuclear installations without any action by Congress. That‘s the scenario I fear, an extra-constitutional war is what I‘m worried about.
SNOW: Well, you‘ve been watching too, too many old movies featuring your old friend Slim Pickens is what you‘re doing now, come on.
MATTHEWS: No, I‘ve been watching the war in Iraq is what I‘ve been watching.
As long as you say to me before we leave tonight that the president has to get approval from Congress before making war on Iran.
SNOW: Let me put it this way. The president understands you‘ve got to have public support for whatever you do. The reason we‘re talking to the American public about the high stakes in Iraq and why it is absolutely vital to succeed is you‘ve got to have public support. And the president certainly, whenever he has taken major actions, he has gone before Congress...
your petitition? Somebody needs to put them on the spot to do so.
get widespread support/!!!!!
we Clark folks are well-informed on this,
but the rest of folks, I am not so sure.
Thanks again General!!!! I know, first things and most important things come first, but ready to go
for you in Nh if and whenyou say the word.
All the best,
Bill (from RI)
Can VoteVets tag team with IAVA &/or any other national security PACs on this? Nothing could be more important.
By the way, just so everyone knows, the "counters" on Youtube are nowhere near accurate.
"Dubya, Dubya, Dubya. STOP IRAN WAR!!! .com"
It sounded like a direct plea to Bush to me. I hope he's listening to this excellent outline of the consequences of a war with Iran!
Clark 08
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/3/7/151849/6801
Nick Kelly
Wes Clark will be the national security candidate.
and Jon and VoteVets.org! We CAN do this!!
Everyone, if you double click on the video it opens up You Tube. Please watch the video there, rate it and comment!
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right.
This is what people need to know. The reason why we need to stop it and the ramifications if we do not.
Thank you, General Wes and Jon Soltz.
I like the way Clark emphasizes the "Dubya, Dubya, Dubya!" in the website address.
The Bill Cosby number about the unruly brat on the plane whose mother kept saying, "Jeffery, Jeffery, Jeffery!"
At least that's what popped into my head when I read your post.
Someone once asked me if I had learned anything from going to war so many times.
My reply:
Yes, I learned how to cry.
Joe Galloway
and to Jon Soltz and VoteVets.org.
I gave StopIranWar buttons, which Dom (Knightrider) shared some with me, to all of my co-workers and I had positive response from them. And of course, first I gave the button to a veteran who is a great co-worker.
News outlets all over the world picked up on it over the weekend. Now if the US media would take notice.
If you want me to bring them to you, or if you know of some good event to take them to, let me know.
There are about 80 or so left, so if you sent 300 with our mutual friend, that means we gave away over 200. He had them laid out in the 3rd district hospitality room. But I was able to talk a "Draft Gore" guy who had a table at the entrance into sharing his space with me, at least for a while (he got kind of hostile later on, but that's a long story), so I took a bunch of them down there where they were VERY popular. I used a hand-made sign that said "Wes Clark and VoteVets.org invite you to join StopIranWar.com."
I also printed off about 64 small bumper stickers (four per 8x11 page) with this modification of Ice's button logo:
and they were all taken before the night was out (except for a couple I held back for myself). I've got one on my car now, right above my Army sticker, and it does look pretty good. "StopIranWar" is pretty easy to remember, so I think bumper stickers are a good idea. Not necessarily with the graphic I used, but anything where the url that can be seen from a distance would work, I think.
"Never underestimate what a determined soldier can accomplish when he's fighting for his country."
Thank you, General Wes, and Jon and VoteVets for doing this crucial work to try to prevent another disastrous war! But why is it that moveon.org can almost immediately get 260K signatures to get Fox from sponsoring a debate, while the stopiranwar petition stands where it does? C'mon folks, we can do better, can we not?
This is very important. I hope the administration gets your point. and soon.
The General gets it right.
Competence--What a concept!
the damage from the Iraq war is bad enough - that from another war would be incalcuable.
Thank you for your leadership on this extremely important topic.
features Rob's new piece on BlueSunBelt.com.
"Wes Clark's Mission".
Rob was thoughtful to do this.
Just one response so far.....
It needs some attention:)
The most encouraging was Senator Levin's office. The very nice person who answered the phone said they had received over 2000 phone calls favoring Senator Webb's resolution to stop funding for a preemptive attack on Iran.
toll free to capital:
1-866--340-9281
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/3/8/134645/2529
Why We Need To Talk About IranExcerpt by Jon Soltz Thu Mar 08, 2007 at 11:13:24 AM PST
Why we need to talk about Iran.
Before I break cyber-ground here with my first ever diary on Kos I want to acknowledge how impressed I am with the DailyKos community. I’m incredibly grateful for everything they have done to highlight our organization (www.votevets.org) in our fight to hold politicians accountable for flawed military strategies and blatant disregard for veterans’ issues.
We owe the success of our Body Armor ad to the amazing response it received on the blogs.
What I really want to focus on today, with this initial blog, is the launch of a joint initiative between VoteVets.org and Ret. General Clark’s WesPAC: StopIranWar.com. We’ve produced a series of Video Blogs that examine how a war with Iran will affect U.S. Security, our troops in Iraq, and the overall stability of the Middle East.
experience ~ Intro Brain Lab
He argues to use massive economic sanctions, such as US pension funds pulling out of companies in the world that do business with Iran, etc...He said he just talked to Giuliani who said the military option has to be on the table in order for the other options to work. Sounds like you've gotten bipartisan attention on this one Wes!
Hi LJM,
"Peace: a time for gathering one's forces." V. Lenin
The notion of using harsh economic sanctions -- the Likudnik version "diplomacy" with Iran -- is not intended to prevent a war. It's intended to provoke a war, and to give the illusion of a "diplomatic approach" while we try to extricate ourselves from Iraq enough that we can strike aggressively at Iran.
"Diplomacy" and "force" are fundamentally different. Diplomacy is about negotiating, and it includes the willingess to concede on key issues in order to gain agreement on others. It's about shaping a solution that both parties can accept as just and fair.
Once you start "applying pressure," you're no longer practicing negotiation. You're practicing extortion. And "agreements" arrived at by extortion can never be as strong as those arrived at by negotiation and consent. They merely plant the seeds for the next conflict.
And that's the point of the neocon-Likudnik-"muscular diplomacy" method. It's about ensuring that there will be continuing conflict, so that we can continue to pour half a trillion dollars into our "defense" industry.
Ironically, the U.S. has been fighting "defensive" wars since 1950 ... always on someone else's homeland ... and every single one of those wars has spawned a network of permanent U.S. military bases by which we bring "stability" (read: "compliance") to the local government.
If I didn't know better, I'd say we've spent the last 60 years in wars of conquest, building a global empire. But we're America. We wouldn't do that....
Crissie
as has Giuliani, the two candidates Rosner's Israel focus group most want to win. They both are pushing for harsh sanctions, which is better than bombs. Bill Clinton talked about sanctions when he spoke at K State. He talked more about diplomacy first at the Washington Days dinner. Both Avigdor Lieberman and Netanyahu have dialed back the attack Iran talk, which is a sign to me that they recognize there's a new sheriff in town. They aren't just pandering to the neocons. Bolton is just freaking out that we're going to talk to Syria and Iran this weekend.
Thank you, General. I'm beating my drum as loudly as I can.
Joy
"Game of Strategic Chicken"
It's good to see someone doing the work.