Kucinich is Right on Iran: Hillary, Edwards, and Obama are following Bush's propaganda

[Luckyduck]

Here is a great video of Kucinich's response to Bush's State of the Union on Washington Journal.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=l79UxLFcauA

He was the only one to point out that Bush is pushing for war in Iran.

Why don't the other candidates admit Bush is lying about the threat to Iran, instead of supporting his push for more war??



Dennis Kucinich on Iran: "President Bush appears to be setting the stage for a wider war in the region...
He is going to add an aircraft carrier to the shores off the coast of Iran...Isn't one war enough for this President?"

Hillary Clinton on Iran:

"We need to use every tool at our disposal, including diplomatic and economic in addition to the threat and use of military force."

John Edwards on Iran:

Edwards criticized the US' previous indifference to the Iranian issue, saying we have not done enough to deal with the threat.

Barack Obama on Iran:

"At what point...if any, are we going to take military action"


Iran Is Judged 10 Years From Nuclear Bomb
U.S. Intelligence Review Contrasts With Administration Statements

A major U.S. intelligence review has projected that Iran is about a decade away from manufacturing the key ingredient for a nuclear weapon, roughly doubling the previous estimate of five years, according to government sources with firsthand knowledge of the new analysis.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/01/AR2005080101453.html

[PhilipShore]

1. Because they are PNAC (the Military-Industrial-Complex) Democrats

I am Clinton's constituent, and most of the time when I would call her office, no one would even pick up the phone. She has accomplished nothing as senator, I guess that makes her well qualified for the DLC, and the PNAC Democrats.

All her politics is simply- lip service.

[shadowknows69]

4. I'll second that

as a disgruntled NYer.

[CrazyOrangeCat]

2. K&R

kick for the patriots like Dennis and Maxine.

:patriot: :patriot:

[mopinko]

12. maxine for pres

eom

[Luckyduck]

3. To me, this is unacceptable!

Americans are sick of Bush's lies! Either start telling the truth,or get the fuck out of the way!

[Luckyduck]

5. Did anyone watch the video?

A friend of mine put this together, he wants to know what you all think...

[cui bono]

15. It keeps freezing on me...

@ 7:08 on the frame with text about Hillary. :(

No other video has ever done that. I can play it over and over up until it hits that part.

[Luckyduck]

17. strange...

Did anyone else have that problem?
:shrug:

[cui bono]

18. I don't know. ;) nt

[Change has come]

27. Excellent video

thanks for posting. :patriot: It froze for me at 7:08 as well.

[scarletwoman]

6. k & r - Sorry, I can't watch the video, very slow dialup connection. Even so, thank you.

This war MUST be stopped before it happens!

sw

[Luckyduck]

7. Thank you!

:hi:

[Nutmegger]

8. I'm tired of wafflers.

After all we know, they should have been against this war a long time ago.

DK is the only peace candidate.

[BayCityProgressive]

9. Kucinich is the only way to go.

[Imagevision]

34. I agree, Kucinich is Right on stopping the funding, it's Bush's bogus war

[Luckyduck]

35. Obama should join him in calling for cutting the funding

If the Democratic Party would just UNITE instead of introducing their own legislation right and left(too many non-binding or supportive of Bush) we might get something done.

How do we get our DEMS to FOCUS and get something done?

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Luckyduck]

11. The Democratic Party must stop supporting Bush's lies

They need to help Dennis put a stop to this bullshit.

[Hardrada]

16. And it seems Kucinich is the only one free of the AIPAC/PNAC

spider web. The others are all captive it would seem and have had their souls sucked out of them.

[mmonk]

38. I would say Clark is free of those two PACs as well.

[Hardrada]

45. I'm considering him also. He would be a great candidate.

[roody]

13. Kucinich is the real thing.

Elizabeth for first lady, a class act!!

[Luckyduck]

14. Here is a great interview with Elizabeth

She really wowed the newscasters...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=uTpoo0uqGbc

She would be an awesome first lady!

[leftchick]

19. why didn't they??? Silly! It Is AIPAC $$$$$ That makes them complicit

DK speaks for me on Iraq and Iran!

:yourock:

thank you for this ld! :)

[truedelphi]

33. I was just going to say that!

GREAT MINDS DO THINK ALIKE!

[fed-up]

kicking for Kucinich n/t

[fed-up]

20. kicking for Kucinich n/t

[mdmc]

21. same with the drug war.

[Luckyduck]

22. Imagine how much money we could save

and how many lives would be so much happier if we let the non violent drug offenders out of prison.

DK is for rehabilitation, not incarceration.

We have more prisoners in this country than anywhere, yet we attack other countries claiming we are free...

[mdmc]

23. for true?

I thought he was for ending Prohibition.

[jab105]

24. I never thought that much about Kucinich until I saw him speak...

it was at the 2004 Take Back America Conference in Washington DC, and he was incredible...amazing how he is pretty much spot on on everything...because he actually stands up for what he believes in, instead of this posturing, I'm tough on terrorism shit that everyone else seems to be playing...

If Gore doesn't get in, I'm going to vote for Kucinich in the primaries, at least to say that I was able to vote for someone who really stood up for what he believed in...unfortuantely, that doesn't make him a good politician...and what a shame that is!

[Luckyduck]

52. he is a great speaker!

listen here

Kucinich on Health care
http://ftp.radio4all.net/pub/archive/05.29.04/kucinich_on_insurance-k93b.mp3

[goodhue]

25. indeed

[goodhue]

53. .

[Skwmom]

26. I think Kucinich is a good, honest, and decent man.

Too bad we can't say that about more of our politicians.

[Imagevision]

28. It's true, Obama didn't vote for the war, however, he did vote for funding it...

[Faryn Balyncd]

29. Who is STANDING AGAINST Bush Iran propaganda? - - Kucinich - - Wes Clark - - Al Gore - - Jim Webb --

Hillary, Edwards, & Obama are rolling over for Bush, when not actually beating the drums themselves (even as the Patriot missiles are being deployed, and as a 2nd naval strike force steams to the Persian Gulf).

[nolabels]

30. MSM gives Hillary, Edwards, & Obama style points for looking good on ..........

The majority of people are now being duped by visual points just like in recent years past. These people that watch the crap, are people who calculate visual points (mostly at a subconscious level) are people who have been fed a steady diet of it for years. These style points have been influenced, enforced and driven home by MSM for like ever. MSM knows they own it and will keep going to hole with along as it wins. What they say doesn't have to sound good, it just has to look good :shrug:


We are playing a shell game and most still don't know how rigged it is.

[goodhue]

31. Kucinich and Clark are apparently lower-tier candidates . . .

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0702030075feb03,1,6054531.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed

Even the lower-tier Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio and retired Gen. Wesley Clark of Arkansas managed to whip up the faithful with their anti-war, anti-Bush rhetoric.

[Imagevision]

32. Kucinich is right! stop the funding, it was a bogus war from day one..!

we're supposed to sacrifice another 3000+ to avenge those already killed by Bush's plan for a permanent US. presence in the middle east? This is the victory George speaks of!

[Larry Ogg]

36. Bad American foreign policy resulted in the Iranian revolution and the Iran we know today.

Kucinich is right we need to do things different.

Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh, founder of Iran's first democratic government, overthrown in a CIA-backed coup in 1953

[magellan]

37. Thank you!

I hadn't seen Kucinich on WJ, but he's my #1 candidate and I love listening to him. He just makes so much sense in every regard and he isn't afraid to speak the truth.

The end of the video looks good, but it froze at 7:08 like it did with others so I had to manually forward through that part to read the quotes.

[govegan]

39. Kucinich is right on! Yes! Kucinich 2008 True Democrat

N/T

[Blackhatjack]

40. You can take Edwards out of your hit list, here is the LINK...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x121424

IF you are going to characterize Edwards as supporting 'Bush's propaganda' you ought to at least read or listen to his positions and be honest about the real reason for your criticism.

Edwards has clearly set himself apart from Bush and his failed policies.

Edwards and Kucinich have much in common in their understanding of the situation and their approach to what needs to be done. They differ in one key respect: Kucinich is pushing a bring them all home at once, right now plan, and Edwards is for an immediate 40,000 home now and gradually bring the rest home over a period of time as authority is transferred to the Iraqi govt, Shiites and Sunnis.

I don't see that as supporting 'Bush's propaganda' and if you were honest, you would retract your accusation.

[Dhalgren]

42. I took the OP's criticism of Edwards to be referring to his support

of a warlike stance toward Iran. Edwards has said that he supports a belligerent attitude toward Iran and that the military option should stay on the table. This supports Bush's build up toward war with Iran and is wholly unconscionable. I think that is what the OP was referring to...

[Blackhatjack]

43. Sorry but you are wrong .....

Edwards has clearly stated he does not agree with 'a belligerent attitude toward Iran.'

Read his interview in American Prospect or his listen to his Meet The Press appearance today, and show me where he has adopted 'a warlike stance toward Iran.'

If anything, he has encouraged diplomacy and economic persuasion as the solution, rather than military force regarding Iran.

I do not find any President in US history that has 'taken off the table' the power to use our military is defend good in the world. Kennedy, Carter, etc. never did. It is the power of the US to encourage bad actor countries and their dictators to reign in their bad acts in the face of an entity that can and will confront them.

However, Edwards does not advocate war with Iran, in fact just the opposite.

[Dhalgren]

46. I like a lot of what Edwards says about a domestic agenda, But I

have little faith in him foreign policy-wise. He seems too ready to to take the "protect America" rhetoric-road. We need fewer politician who play this card rather than more...

[Blackhatjack]

47. I'm curious, what part of his positions toward Iran on MTP did you not agree with?

There are more ways to 'protect America' than using military might. Edwards has proposed diplomacy and economic measures for a long time.

[Dhalgren]

49. I did not see his performance on MTP.

I have read a couple of his speeches from earlier this month and I was concerned by his contribution to the "Iran is evil" chorus. His making a point of saying that we cannot allow Iran to have nuclear energy and that military options will stay on the table are worrying. These are all statements that reinforce Bush's bellicosity and panders to the slim minority who see Iran as a natural enemy to the US. That is old thinking - the same kind of thinking that led senators and congresspersons to vote to empower Bush to invade Iraq. Edwards says that he has learned his lesson in regards to the IWR, but his statements regarding our stand with Iran makes me wonder. Now, if his MTP performance contradicted his speeches of the past couple of weeks, I would be pleased to know that.

[Blackhatjack]

50. I would be interested in reading the speeches you characterized...

Edwards has been saying the exact opposite. He proposed again on MTP that we give Iran nuclear fuel for electricity generation with the provisio that we handle the cycling so that it cannot be turned into bomb making material. He has not said 'Iran is evil' in any public statement I can find. His approach to Iran is 180 degrees different from Bush's --advocating direct talks with Iran and Syria, and regional powers in the Middle East. He has proposed we act with Europe to put together economic incentives that will appeal to the people in Iran, and put more pressure on Ahmadinejad if he turned them down. He has called for an immediate 40,000 troops be sent home now, and the rest in an orderly manner.

I really would like to see the actual quotes you are referring to in making these statements.

[Luckyduck]

51. Read his speech in Israel

He is pretending that Iran is a threat when it is not.

This type of bullshit justifies Bush continuing his propaganda.

If the Dems all stood together and said "The evidence shows Iran is not a threat" and kept repeating it, Bush could not have his war in Iran. As of now, they are enabling him, just like they did in Iraq. If Edwards truly feels bad about co-sponsoring the legislation to take us to war in Iraq, he ought to try some reading before he promises Israel that he can help us understand that Iran is a threat. If you want more opinions, try surfing around DU. Many MANY people are not happy with Edwards statements.

[Blackhatjack]

55. Ok give me the quote where Edwards says Iran is a threat ....

Edwards has said for some time that we must engage in direct talks with Iran and Syria. Is this the Bush position? Edwards has suggested regional negotiations to help reach a political solution in Iraq. Is this Bush's position? Edwards has called for an immediate 40,000 troops be brought home. Is this Bush's position?

I read lots of naysayers here at DU slamming Edwards for supporting Bush's positions and propaganda. I challenge each of them to provide the quotes from him. So far all I have received in return are attacks on me for my motives, and generalizations with no quotes provided.

Of course some people would rather rely upon what they heard from someone else rather than investigate the matter and determine the truth by examining facts.

Edwards comments on Meet The Press today and his interview in American Prospect set exactly the right approach for dealing with Iran and Iraq. If you have quotes that contradict what he said in both venues, let's have them.....

[joe_b]

56. Here's what Edwards said to Herzliya about Iran

From a Pat Buchanan article dated 1/30/07: "Came then U.S. peace candidate John Edwards. Keeping Iran from nuclear weapons 'is the greatest challenge of our generation. ... To ensure that Iran never gets nuclear weapons, we need to keep all options on the table. ... Let me reiterate – all options.'"

That "all options" statement says Edwards is willing to go to war to stop Iran from getting a nuke. That's right out of the Bush playbook. I can't go along with that. I agree with Chirac on that issue. If the US would quit threatening them, they wouldn't need a nuke. That statement by Edwards indicates bad judgment and a really disturbing thought process.

I view that "all options" statement as a threat not just against Iran but against the American people. It's not right to casually threaten war. It's upsetting to have that threat hanging out there all the time. I want a President who won't play mind games with me. This is why I wion't consider Edwards or Hillary in the primaries.

[Blackhatjack]

58. OK thanks for the sound bite quote, now here is what he meant by the full quote...

The partial sound bite quote you cited "... To ensure that Iran never gets nuclear weapons, we need to keep all options on the table. ... Let me reiterate – all options."

Edwards was talking about his approach compared to the present Bush approach to heading off Iran obtaining nuclear weapons, in which Bush's approach has been limited to a show of military force and failure to talk to Iran directly and eventually using military force.

As Edwards explained in his Meet The Press appearance yesterday, and in his interview in The American Prospect, the 'all options on the table' approach includes diplomacy first, engagement with other regional countries in the Middle East, direct talks with Iran and Syria, partnering with Europe which has economic clout with Iran, crafting of economic incentives that appeal to the Iranian people, isolation of Ahmadinejad, ramped up economic sanctions if Ahmadinejad fails to respond, and above all no military attack on Iran which would rally the Iranian people to Ahmadinejad's side. He also explained, you never take the military option off the table in dealing with anyone, which Clinton and Carter both refused to do during their tenures as President.

Also he specifically stated a military attack on Iran would be a disaster, and he recommended that the US and Europe provide Iran with all the nuclear fuel they needed to make electricity on the condition that the US would handle the 'cycling' of the nuclear material so that it would never be turned into bomb making material.

Now there is no doubt that an Iranian government ruled by religious leaders having nuclear weapons would be a major threat to the existence of Israel, since they have not withdrawn their intent to wipe Israel off the map. There is no doubt Israel is a US ally. But much more important, Israel has nuclear weapons, and a nuclear conflict in the Middle East would be the most catastrophic situation to arise for the world at large in this generation.

You need to separate the facts from the 'spin' that Pat Buchanan ascribes to this sound bite quote, and read the American Prospect interview and listen to Edwards on Meet the Press for a fuller understanding of exactly what Edwards means when he refers to 'keeping all options on the table.'

[Marie26]

41. Got to pay to play. nt

[ohio2007]

44. Don't forget the fund raising circuit

Kucinich doesn't make friends with big business and he won't "promise" anything in return for contributions.

His best hope is going into the convention and promise to support another dems candidacy.

[Blackhatjack]

48. For a Kucinich-type candidate to win, the following will have to happen first...

1. Campaign finance reform that puts candidates on an equal footing.
2. Break up the MSM consolidation and ownership.

I think someone other than Kucinich would have to be elected and make those changes once they are in office for a Kucinich candidacy to have a fair chance of succeeding.

[Vidar]

54. Kucinich is right about damned near everything.

[joe_b]

57. Thanks for the video

That was awesome. Kucinich makes sense. I like the fact he doesn't speak in soundbites. He understands the issue and can articulate his beliefs, which are 100% right on. He's the only candidate I've seen who has that kind of grasp of the issue. He's my candidate for sure.

The clip of him speaking on healthcare also was great. Single payer system, exactly what we need. I like the part where he tells how he went to the Democratic leadership to argue for a single payer system and they warned him he was upsetting their insurance contributors. He compared them to insurance salesman because they want an insurance system, not a healthcare system. Again, he's right on.

[treestar]

59. Why, after the last election, are there any Democrats afraid

to just come out against the war in Iraq, let alone the saber rattling at Iran?

It just seems counterintuitive. Some of them could be accused of flip-flopping but what is that next to the People's obvious rejection of the Iraq war and further such war?