Giuliani's Foreign Policy Adviser Sounds like a Madman

In an interview in Saturday's Daily Telegraph, one of Rudy Giuliani's leading foreign policy advisers-- Norman Podhoretz --prattles on about we must bomb Iran. Talking about military strikes, including cruise missiles and "bunker busters", this neoncon man sounds delusional: "It would take five minutes. You'd wake up one morning and the strikes would have been ordered and carried out during the night. All the president has to say is go."

Putting aside the immorality and illegality of this death wish, military action would be irrational for both sides. The US military is already stretched to the breaking point. We'd witness unprecedented pandemonium in oil markets. Our troops in Iraq would be endangered.

What about the fact that six weeks of bombing in the Gulf War in 1991 didn't take out the Iraqi Scud missiles? Nor did the Israeli bombing of Iraq's Osirak reactor have any impact on curbing regional proliferation. What about Podhoretz's professed concern for democracy in the region, especially for Iran's dissidents?

Listen to Akbar Ganji, an Iranian journalist and dissident, who sat in Evin Prison from 2000 to 2006. In an op-ed for the Washington Post last week, he wrote: "The Iranian people, myself included, need freedom, democracy and peace--not war conditions and constant worries about a potential barrage of US missiles."

Podhoretz and his insanity will embolden Iranian hardliners, plunge the region into even greater and darker instability and undermine our security. If one needed any more reasons why Rudy Giuliani should be fully, completely, unequivocally disqualified from being President and Commander-in-Chief, listen to Podhoretz's insanity.

Comments (57)

1. Podhoretz?

   that neocon bufoon? sure...bomb iran. while we are bombing iran so they wont get a nuke...pakistan (where bin laden is and where existant nukes are) is on the verge of islamic fundamentalist revolution!

   oh, and as we rain down cruise missiles on the iranian nuke plant i hope we dont kill too many russian advisors...

   ha ha ha! just when i think the neocon "brain trust" cant get any stupider...

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 3:06pm

2. KvH: We'd witness unprecedented pandemonium in oil markets. Our troops in Iraq would be endangered. What about the fact that six weeks of bombing in the Gulf War in 1991 didn't take out the Iraqi Scud missiles? Nor did the Israeli bombing of Iraq's Osirak reactor have any impact on curbing regional proliferation.

   I am NOT advocating bombing Iran anytime soon! Now....

   My guess is Katrina does NOT think oil rising from $60 at beginning of the year to $91 (50%+) qualifies as "pandemonium"! Nor the jump from $70 to $91 (30%) in just a little over this past two months. We agree, neither do I! So, if Iran IS BOMBED, oil's going up by another 30% to 50% would hardly be "pandemonium"....the jump HAS TO BE much more, right? Say at least doubling!

   Is there some reason to think our troops in Iraq are NOT now "endangered" by Iran's actions in Iraq?

   Taking out mobile, easily hid, and inexpensive Crud Missiles is probably much harder than to take out nuclear installations, military airports, Revolutionary Guard bases and naval assets. Just a wild hunch on my part....I'm no satellite imagery experts! Monetarily, even if we know where the Cruds are, I am not sure I would use multi-million dollar smart weapons to take out el cheapo, inaccurato Cruds!

   Lastly, Israel's taking out Iraq's reactor had no impact? Odd, I could swear that bombing took place between 20 to 30 years ago....to date, while ambitions & clandestine works may be there, few believes that actual ARAB NUKES exist!

   While Norman Podhoretz sounds a little too war-ready and madman-ish, KvH ought to counter with something more solid!

   Time for the Texans to kick the Chargers ass in San Diego....hope all the fire refugees have been able to return home!

   Posted by Happy at 10/28/2007 @ 3:54pm

3. Posted by HAPPY 10/28/2007 @ 3:54pm

   See? HAPPY's not advocating it...

   he's just saying it would be easy, the Iranians helpless to strike back, and the economic and political aftermath no a big deal!

   but he's not advocating it!

   Posted by Mask at 10/28/2007 @ 4:10pm

4. BTW, I seriously expect some of our neo-con friends here to claim that....

   it'll be a "cake-walk" and "oil revenues will pay for it"!

   LOL!

   Posted by Mask at 10/28/2007 @ 4:11pm

5. Time for the Texans to kick the Chargers ass in San Diego....hope all the fire refugees have been able to return home!

   Posted by HAPPY 10/28/2007 @ 3:54pm

   poor panthers - but kudos to old man testaverde! almost 44...

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 4:14pm

6. Posted by MASK 10/28/2007 @ 4:11pm

   or hey...we could turn their country into a parking lot - cuz we're the good guys!

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 4:15pm

7. BUST CHENEY NOT BUNKERS...

   The criminal idea of bombing Iran really originates with Dick Cheney not Norman Podhoretz. (Impeach Cheney!) Podhoretz is just doing his neocon thing and going along with the idea. Of course, the fact that the guy is completely around the bend intellectually makes it easier. That Giuliani regards him as one of his main foreign policy advisers is even scarier.

   I used to think that I could at least understand and appreciate where conservatives were coming from even when I totally disagreed with them. No more. Supporting this kind of warmongering initiative really is just pure insanity. It means conservativism -- especially in its neocon incarnation -- has basically turned into just another severe psychiatric disorder, kind of on a par with serial killer. (This means you, dwarfo....)

   Posted by w_m_bear at 10/28/2007 @ 5:10pm

8. or hey...we could turn their country into a parking lot - cuz we're the good guys!

   Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 10/28/2007 @ 4:15pm

   I BELIEVE THE MILITARY JARGON IS...

   "Nuke and pave."

   Posted by w_m_bear at 10/28/2007 @ 5:11pm

9. Posted by W_M_BEAR 10/28/2007 @ 5:11pm

   we fear that a nuke armed iran would use its nukes to threaten other nations. of course we never ever did such (har har).

   cant take the moral highground when you play dirty pool...

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 5:17pm

10. but honestly...blowback, karma, whatever you want to call it, our foriegn policy since ww2 has been characterized by one dirty evil intervention after another, and it continues.

    we simply cant run around screaming "terrorism" when we have supported and continue to support terrorism all over the world ourselves!

    sure, pop culturally lobotomized joe/jane schmuk here might fall for that crap, but those victims of our terrorism and the educated citizenry of the rest of the developed world know the truth about our dirty "secrets".

    iran - 52

    guatemala - 56

    chile - 71(?)

    and god knows what else...evil after evil after evil in the name of anticommernism, freedom, whatever...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 5:24pm

11. Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 10/28/2007 @ 5:24pm

    IBBLE -- FACT IS, I BELIEVE IN KARMA...

    Which is basically simply the metaphysics of "What goes around comes around." There is also such a thing as national as well as individual karma. And I completely agree with you that, since WWII, the U.S. has accumulated a whole shitload of ATROCIOUS national karma starting really with the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the close of WWII, taking what had been a just cause and basically trashing that concept in a holocaust of OUR making. Continuing through Korea, Vietnam, Iran (installing the Shah to replace the democratically elected government), overthrow of democratically elected Allende in Chile, support of the Contras, invasion of Grenada, Iraq, etc., etc., etc.

    As a result, America is heading for a big fall. To give my favorite quote from Stanley Kubrick's "Full Metal Jacket" (arguably the best war movie ever made): "It's a huge shit sandwich and we've all got to take a bite."

    . . . .

    Posted by w_m_bear at 10/28/2007 @ 5:41pm

12. its the accumulated result one dirty trick after another.

    they say to us, "without these dirty tricks, you wouldn't have all these walmarts and 200 channels to choose from and the freedom to play so many video games, pinko!"

    well, so the price of our heaven like existance is the misery of far away people many of us are only dimly aware of? sort of like how rome's prosperity was built on conquest, plunder and slavery of non-romans?

    well, if thats the deal, if our prosperity is based on the suffering of little understood other people...what does that mean about us? and for that matter, eventually the non-america world ust sooner or later come to the conclusion that they must either be our lapdogs or oppose us.

    a critical mass is being reached in which more and more will choose to oppose us.

    the absurdity of this is that it really does not have to be this way. this arrogant borg like worldview of ours, since we do not possess the power to conquer the world, will do nothing but crystalize opposition to us until one day enough non-americans realize they dont need us...

    that day cant come soon enough.

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 6:01pm

13. and it sux that some who oppose us are truly abominable (islamic fundamentalists)...but opposing abomination with abomination...just digs our grave deeper.

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 6:04pm

14. I suggest Happy turn to the solid remarks of the current Head of the Joint Chiefs who said the other week that a military attack on Iran would be destabilizing, counter-productive and more. One of the chief checks on a strike is the ardent opposition within the military to such action.As a civilian/citizen wary of military overreach I'm not sure this is the best say to avert a catastrophe--but there it is. kvh

    Posted by Katrina vanden Heuvel at 10/28/2007 @ 6:09pm

15. KVH

    what is it? bushco has shown such abysmal evil stupidity...but are they THAT stupid?

    if i didnt know (based on their previous actions) they were indeed so malevolently lackwitted, i would assume they were using their well earned rep for evil, violent, stoopidity to try to rattle the iranians into negotiating...

    but then they are evil, violent and stupid...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 6:26pm

16. but the problem is that i dont think the iranians are scared. they know we are stretched strategically, morally, economically...and they have friends in the russians and chinese now...

    i think they would welcome an attack.

    the neocons cant really be stupid and violent and malevolent enough to do it, can they?

    or can they?

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 6:30pm

17. ...but there it is. kvh

    Posted by KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL 10/28/2007 @ 6:09pm

    I kinda recall some news blurb by the Joint Chiefs that you referred to. Their position/prognosis is infinitely more weighty than ANY adviser to ANY POTUS candidate!

    The Nuclear Genie has left her bottle and I don't see her ever going back in....all the `traditional' nuclear powers are guilty, that includes us! We need anti-missile shields and much tighter border controls...both are within our capabilities...matter of priorities! As everyone knows, I'm genetically HAPPY....but, IMO, it's just a matter of WHEN, NOT IF, a nuclear device will be intentionally set off--outside the context of a formal war--against the West or Israel, in all likelihood!

    Posted by Happy at 10/28/2007 @ 7:02pm

18. ....he's just saying it would be easy, the Iranians helpless to strike back, and the economic and political aftermath no a big deal!

    but he's not advocating it!

    Posted by MASK 10/28/2007 @ 4:10pm

    There you go again!

    Tell me exactly how my comments are interpreted by you to be saying "would be easy" or "Iranians helpless" or "no big deal" on fallouts?

    Strictly on the nuclear issue, IMO, just like N. Korea is China's, S. Korea and Japan's problem, I sort of think Iran is Israel's, Arab's (esp. Sunnis) and Russia's problem. As I said before, if Iran is ever thought to have given nukes to some organization that let loose a nuke explosion in the US, I'd support wiping Iran permanently off the face of the earth....but in the meantime, if they want nukes, let them! IF they threaten, for real, our first-tier allies, like Japan and Israel, we'll deal with that as it comes! I'm NOT as hands-off as Buchanan but nowhere a global (classical) liberal....that some call Neo-Cons!

    For Iran's killing Americans in Iraq, I'd `even the playing field' and dramatically increase our support for all opposition groups in Iran w/arms and money...that plus the sanctions that we have unilaterally imposed!

    These are my own opinions/views....but if the CIC decides, with the Joint Chiefs, more aggressive actions are warranted...I'd support them, even if a Dem is the POTUS! One does NOT have to agree w/every decision in order to support someone generally!

    Posted by Happy at 10/28/2007 @ 7:22pm

19. Posted by HAPPY 10/28/2007 @ 7:22pm

    Gee, HAPP...I guess EVERYBODY (including Ms vanden Heuvel) just "totally misinterpreted" what you said...

    and not that you are now trying to back-pedal from a view opposed by....THE PENTAGON!

    Posted by Mask at 10/28/2007 @ 8:08pm

20. I think this guy is a bufoon, but Giuliani the head of clowns. And he is a clown because he fakes what he is not. Posing to be a though man, he is softer than butter and we might just look at his personal life to make our conclusions.

    Mad is the right adjective for Podhoretz. These neocons think they are playing "star wars" and not dealing with humans. Almost 4,000 Americans have died in Iraq and estimates of Iraqis dead are not less than 150,000. Ciphers in Iran would be multiplied by five or more. Why? Because Iranis are much more religiously and nationalistically involved than Iraqis and will take an American invasion very seriously.

    Mr. Neo-con thinks every thing can be done by air? Not really. Iran will "feel free" to invade Iraq - and a fraction of Iraqi shiites will welcome it - and the damage over oil facilities throughout the Persian Gulf would be enormous. Not forgetting what will the stand of Russia be.

    Those Neo cons should be judged as the Nazis were in 2nd World war. Sending people to death, or bringing death to any place in the world that is not in war with us is criminal business.

    Posted by Frank42 at 10/28/2007 @ 8:19pm

21. the neocons cant really be stupid and violent and malevolent enough to do it, can they?

    or can they?

    Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 10/28/2007 @ 6:30pm

    THE ANSWER SADLY IS, I'M AFRAID, YES, THEY CAN...

    And re KVH's point about the U.S. military being "stretched too thin" in Iraq, given the TYPE of bombing/cruise-missile attack that Cheney & Co. seem to have in mind, I don't think the strictly TACTICAL considerations are a major obstacle. I'd just remind everyone that the U.S. has two carrier strike groups in the Persian Gulf standing off the coast of Iran, locked and loaded, just waiting for Bush to give the word apparently. These strike groups are, evidently, "dedicated" for this purpose and are not mainly there in support of the U.S. military in Iraq. Hence the "stretched thin" argument doesn't seem to be the restraining factor here.

    I suspect the Pentagon opposes such an attack mainly for strategic and even foreign policy purposes (which would include strategic ones) and not because they're worried about capability. (I would hope also that some consideration is being given even in Pentagon circles to the sheer immorality and, indeed, the sheer insanity of such an attack.)

    Posted by w_m_bear at 10/28/2007 @ 8:21pm

22. Those Neo cons should be judged as the Nazis were in 2nd World war. Sending people to death, or bringing death to any place in the world that is not in war with us is criminal business.

    Posted by FRANK42 10/28/2007 @ 8:19pm

    YES, LET'S CALL NEOCONSERVATISM BY ITS RIGHT NAME...

    Which is "cryptofacism." It is "crypto-" because it is "the fascism that dare not speak it's name," and fascistic because it seeks to implement U.S. imperial power in the world by stengthening the Executive branch of government to the point that it has virtually dictatorial powers to carry out such a program with or without the "consent of the governed." Podhoretz is one of the main intellectual architects of this home-grown fascism, and the fact that Giuliani is treating him as some kind of foreign-policy guru means that Giuliani's own stance is basically fascistic as well, however liberal his stand may be on so-called "values" issues....

    BTW, Nazism was simply one FORM of fascism, which is the more general (and appropriate) label to apply to these crazies. And I would argue that it DOES make sense to apply this label to people like Podhoretz. They ARE fascistic and it is not an exaggeration to label them as such.

    Posted by w_m_bear at 10/28/2007 @ 8:42pm

23. yeah - 2 carrier groups...i guess the bushites feel they can get away with an ariel smash of the nuke plant and the iranians wont retaliate...

    ugly...risky...stupid...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 8:48pm

24. obverse democratic fascism...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 8:50pm

25. and god knows what else...evil after evil after evil in the name of anticommernism, freedom, whatever...

    Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 10/28/2007 @ 5:24pm |

    shall i post the list again?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2007 @ 8:56pm

26. increase our support for all opposition groups in Iran w/arms and money...

    Posted by HAPPY 10/28/2007 @ 7:22pm

    but doesn't that mean (more) state-sponsored terrorism?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2007 @ 8:57pm

27. obverse - instead of politicos co-opting business, elements of business co-opt politicians...

    democratic - cant have "america" without "democracy" - but facade of democracy is all thats needed...buy the candidates of both parties, control media...presto - sham democracy!

    fascism - at some point rabid anti-comernism and buzillion dollar secret keeping establishment met up with randian nhilistic objectivism to form modern american early 21st century soft core fascism!

    its what keeps us having champagne dreams, caviar fantasies, ever falling median income, cheap plastic crap, shitty health insurance and spreading misery worldwide!

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 9:04pm

28. Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 10/28/2007 @ 8:56pm

    i hope you have it saved somewhere...lol

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 9:05pm

29. ...you are now trying to back-pedal from a view opposed by....THE PENTAGON!

    Posted by MASK 10/28/2007 @ 8:08pm

    Are you really this closed minded? Why should I back-pedal? Did I advocate full-out attack? From what I read, I am far more open-minded to alternative strategies, or even non-strategies than you are. Ms. KvH obviously recognized the weak parts of her `arguments' better than you did! In case you didn't get it, I was applauding her for mentioning the far more credible Joint Chiefs. So many times, I literally have to spell out everything for you....damn, you;re slow!

    You have said nothing of what, in your opinion, we should do, if anything. Taking potshots at others is your specialty, how about some solutions, even just leaving Iran alone?

    Posted by Happy at 10/28/2007 @ 9:10pm

30. i hope you have it saved somewhere...lol

    Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 10/28/2007 @ 9:05pm

    here ya go bro'. you can do the formatting!

    http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html

    COUNTRY OR STATE Dates of intervention Forces Comments SOUTH DAKOTA 1890 (-?) Troops 300 Lakota Indians massacred at Wounded Knee. ARGENTINA 1890 Troops Buenos Aires interests protected. CHILE 1891 Troops Marines clash with nationalist rebels. HAITI 1891 Troops Black revolt on Navassa defeated. IDAHO 1892 Troops Army suppresses silver miners' strike. HAWAII 1893 (-?) Naval, troops Independent kingdom overthrown, annexed. CHICAGO 1894 Troops Breaking of rail strike, 34 killed. NICARAGUA 1894 Troops Month-long occupation of Bluefields. CHINA 1894-95 Naval, troops Marines land in Sino-Japanese War KOREA 1894-96 Troops Marines kept in Seoul during war. PANAMA 1895 Troops, naval Marines land in Colombian province. NICARAGUA 1896 Troops Marines land in port of Corinto. CHINA 1898-1900 Troops Boxer Rebellion fought by foreign armies. PHILIPPINES 1898-1910 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, killed 600,000 Filipinos CUBA 1898-1902 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, still hold Navy base. PUERTO RICO 1898 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, occupation continues. GUAM 1898 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, still use as base. MINNESOTA 1898 (-?) Troops Army battles Chippewa at Leech Lake. NICARAGUA 1898 Troops Marines land at port of San Juan del Sur. SAMOA 1899 (-?) Troops Battle over succession to throne. NICARAGUA 1899 Troops Marines land at port of Bluefields. IDAHO 1899-1901 Troops Army occupies Coeur d'Alene mining region. OKLAHOMA 1901 Troops Army battles Creek Indian revolt. PANAMA 1901-14 Naval, troops Broke off from Colombia 1903, annexed Canal Zone 1914. HONDURAS 1903 Troops Marines intervene in revolution. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1903-04 Troops U.S. interests protected in Revolution. KOREA 1904-05 Troops Marines land in Russo-Japanese War. CUBA 1906-09 Troops Marines land in democratic election. NICARAGUA 1907 Troops "Dollar Diplomacy" protectorate set up. HONDURAS 1907 Troops Marines land during war with Nicaragua PANAMA 1908 Troops Marines intervene in election contest. NICARAGUA 1910 Troops Marines land in Bluefields and Corinto. HONDURAS 1911 Troops U.S. interests protected in civil war. CHINA 1911-41 Naval, troops Continuous occupation with flare-ups. CUBA 1912 Troops U.S. interests protected in civil war. PANAMA 1912 Troops Marines land during heated election. HONDURAS 1912 Troops Marines protect U.S. economic interests. NICARAGUA 1912-33 Troops, bombing 10-year occupation, fought guerillas MEXICO 1913 Naval Americans evacuated during revolution. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1914 Naval Fight with rebels over Santo Domingo. COLORADO 1914 Troops Breaking of miners' strike by Army. MEXICO 1914-18 Naval, troops Series of interventions against nationalists. HAITI 1914-34 Troops, bombing 19-year occupation after revolts. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1916-24 Troops 8-year Marine occupation. CUBA 1917-33 Troops Military occupation, economic protectorate. WORLD WAR I 1917-18 Naval, troops Ships sunk, fought Germany for 1 1/2 years. RUSSIA 1918-22 Naval, troops Five landings to fight Bolsheviks PANAMA 1918-20 Troops "Police duty" during unrest after elections. HONDURAS 1919 Troops Marines land during election campaign. YUGOSLAVIA 1919 Troops/Marines intervene for Italy against Serbs in Dalmatia. GUATEMALA 1920 Troops 2-week intervention against unionists. WEST VIRGINIA 1920-21 Troops, bombing Army intervenes against mineworkers. TURKEY 1922 Troops Fought nationalists in Smyrna. CHINA 1922-27 Naval, troops Deployment during nationalist revolt. HONDURAS 1924-25 Troops Landed twice during election strife. PANAMA 1925 Troops Marines suppress general strike. CHINA 1927-34 Troops Marines stationed throughout the country. EL SALVADOR 1932 Naval Warships send during Marti revolt. WASHINGTON DC 1932 Troops Army stops WWI vet bonus protest. WORLD WAR II 1941-45 Naval, troops, bombing, nuclear Hawaii bombed, fought Japan, Italy and Germay for 3 years; first nuclear war. DETROIT 1943 Troops Army put down Black rebellion. IRAN 1946 Nuclear threat Soviet troops told to leave north. YUGOSLAVIA 1946 Nuclear threat, naval Response to shoot-down of US plane. URUGUAY 1947 Nuclear threat Bombers deployed as show of strength. GREECE 1947-49 Command operation U.S. directs extreme-right in civil war. GERMANY 1948 Nuclear Threat Atomic-capable bombers guard Berlin Airlift. CHINA 1948-49 Troops/Marines evacuate Americans before Communist victory. PHILIPPINES 1948-54 Command operation CIA directs war against Huk Rebellion. PUERTO RICO 1950 Command operation Independence rebellion crushed in Ponce. KOREA 1951-53 (-?) Troops, naval, bombing , nuclear threats U.S./So. Korea fights China/No. Korea to stalemate; A-bomb threat in 1950, and against China in 1953. Still have bases. IRAN 1953 Command Operation CIA overthrows democracy, installs Shah. VIETNAM 1954 Nuclear threat French offered bombs to use against seige. GUATEMALA 1954 Command operation, bombing, nuclear threat CIA directs exile invasion after new gov't nationalized U.S. company lands; bombers based in Nicaragua. EGYPT 1956 Nuclear threat, troops Soviets told to keep out of Suez crisis; Marines evacuate foreigners. LEBANON l958 Troops, naval Marine occupation against rebels. IRAQ 1958 Nuclear threat Iraq warned against invading Kuwait. CHINA l958 Nuclear threat China told not to move on Taiwan isles. PANAMA 1958 Troops Flag protests erupt into confrontation. VIETNAM l960-75 Troops, naval, bombing, nuclear threats Fought South Vietnam revolt & North Vietnam; one million killed in longest U.S. war; atomic bomb threats in l968 and l969. CUBA l961 Command operation CIA-directed exile invasion fails. GERMANY l961 Nuclear threat Alert during Berlin Wall crisis. LAOS 1962 Command operation Military buildup during guerrilla war. CUBA l962 Nuclear threat, naval Blockade during missile crisis; near-war with Soviet Union. IRAQ 1963 Command operation CIA organizes coup that killed president, brings Ba'ath Party to power, and Saddam Hussein back from exile to be head of the secret service. PANAMA l964 Troops Panamanians shot for urging canal's return. INDONESIA l965 Command operation Million killed in CIA-assisted army coup. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1965-66 Troops, bombing Marines land during election campaign. GUATEMALA l966-67 Command operation Green Berets intervene against rebels. DETROIT l967 Troops Army battles African Americans, 43 killed. UNITED STATES l968 Troops After King is shot; over 21,000 soldiers in cities. CAMBODIA l969-75 Bombing, troops, naval Up to 2 million killed in decade of bombing, starvation, and political chaos. OMAN l970 Command operation U.S. directs Iranian marine invasion. LAOS l971-73 Command operation, bombing U.S. directs South Vietnamese invasion; "carpet-bombs" countryside. SOUTH DAKOTA l973 Command operation Army directs Wounded Knee siege of Lakotas. MIDEAST 1973 Nuclear threat World-wide alert during Mideast War. CHILE 1973 Command operation CIA-backed coup ousts elected marxist president. CAMBODIA l975 Troops, bombing Gas captured ship, 28 die in copter crash. ANGOLA l976-92 Command operation CIA assists South African-backed rebels. IRAN l980 Troops, nuclear threat, aborted bombing Raid to rescue Embassy hostages; 8 troops die in copter-plane crash. Soviets warned not to get involved in revolution. LIBYA l981 Naval jets Two Libyan jets shot down in maneuvers. EL SALVADOR l981-92 Command operation, troops Advisors, overflights aid anti-rebel war, soldiers briefly involved in hostage clash. NICARAGUA l981-90 Command operation, naval CIA directs exile (Contra) invasions, plants harbor mines against revolution. LEBANON l982-84 Naval, bombing, troops Marines expel PLO and back Phalangists, Navy bombs and shells Muslim positions. GRENADA l983-84 Troops, bombing Invasion four years after revolution. HONDURAS l983-89 Troops Maneuvers help build bases near borders. IRAN l984 Jets Two Iranian jets shot down over Persian Gulf. LIBYA l986 Bombing, naval Air strikes to topple nationalist gov't. BOLIVIA 1986 Troops Army assists raids on cocaine region. IRAN l987-88 Naval, bombing US intervenes on side of Iraq in war. LIBYA 1989 Naval jets Two Libyan jets shot down. VIRGIN ISLANDS 1989 Troops St. Croix Black unrest after storm. PHILIPPINES 1989 Jets Air cover provided for government against coup. PANAMA 1989 (-?) Troops, bombing Nationalist government ousted by 27,000 soldiers, leaders arrested, 2000+ killed. LIBERIA 1990 Troops Foreigners evacuated during civil war. SAUDI ARABIA 1990-91 Troops, jets Iraq countered after invading Kuwait. 540,000 troops also stationed in Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Israel. IRAQ 1990-? Bombing, troops, naval Blockade of Iraqi and Jordanian ports, air strikes; 200,000+ killed in invasion of Iraq and Kuwait; no-fly zone over Kurdish north, Shiite south, large-scale destruction of Iraqi military. KUWAIT 1991 Naval, bombing, troops Kuwait royal family returned to throne. LOS ANGELES 1992 Troops Army, Marines deployed against anti-police uprising. SOMALIA 1992-94 Troops, naval, bombing U.S.-led United Nations occupation during civil war; raids against one Mogadishu faction. YUGOSLAVIA 1992-94 Naval NATO blockade of Serbia and Montenegro. BOSNIA 1993-? Jets, bombing No-fly zone patrolled in civil war; downed jets, bombed Serbs. HAITI 1994 Troops, naval Blockade against military government; troops restore President Aristide to office three years after coup. ZAIRE (CONGO) 1996-97 Troops Marines at Rwandan Hutu refugee camps, in area where Congo revolution begins. LIBERIA 1997 Troops Soldiers under fire during evacuation of foreigners. ALBANIA 1997 Troops Soldiers under fire during evacuation of foreigners. SUDAN 1998 Missiles Attack on pharmaceutical plant alleged to be "terrorist" nerve gas plant. AFGHANISTAN 1998 Missiles Attack on former CIA training camps used by Islamic fundamentalist groups alleged to have attacked embassies. IRAQ 1998-? Bombing, Missiles Four days of intensive air strikes after weapons inspectors allege Iraqi obstructions. YUGOSLAVIA 1999 Bombing, Missiles Heavy NATO air strikes after Serbia declines to withdraw from Kosovo. NATO occupation of Kosovo. YEMEN 2000 Naval USS Cole, docked in Aden, bombed. MACEDONIA 2001 Troops NATO forces deployed to move and disarm Albanian rebels. UNITED STATES 2001 Jets, naval Reaction to hijacker attacks on New York, DC AFGHANISTAN 2001-? Troops, bombing, missiles Massive U.S. mobilization to overthrow Taliban, hunt Al Qaeda fighters, install Karzai regime, and battle Taliban insurgency. YEMEN 2002 Missiles Predator drone missile attack on Al Qaeda, including a US citizen. PHILIPPINES 2002-? Troops, naval Training mission for Philippine military fighting Abu Sayyaf rebels evolves into US combat missions in Sulu Archipelago next to Mindanao. COLOMBIA 2003-? Troops US special forces sent to rebel zone to back up Colombian military protecting oil pipeline. IRAQ 2003-? Troops, naval, bombing, missiles Saddam regime toppled in Baghdad. US and UK forces occupy country and battle Sunni and Shi'ite insurgencies. Clashes on border with Syria. LIBERIA 2003 Troops Brief involvement in peacekeeping force as rebels drove out leader. HAITI 2004-05 Troops, naval Marines land after rebels oust elected President Aristide, who was advised to leave by Washington. PAKISTAN 2005-? Missiles, covert operation CIA airstrikes on Al Qaeda refuge villages kill civilians SOMALIA 2007 Missiles, naval AC-130 strikes; naval blockade and Cruise missile attacks against Islamist rebels

    Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2007 @ 9:15pm

31. ....that mean (more) state-sponsored terrorism?

    Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 10/28/2007 @ 8:57pm

    I sure hope the groups we would support are not going to conduct the type of operations we've seen in Iraq where over 90% of casualties are civilians. I would put `strings' on the support!

    BTW, the support need not be in military terms....can be like Poland's Orange Revolution...in fact, may make Iran more wary.....simmering and simmering...just waiting to boil over!

    Posted by Happy at 10/28/2007 @ 9:19pm

32. Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 10/28/2007 @ 9:15pm

    wow...some of which was justified...but enough of which was not to make my point...thanks.

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 9:28pm

33. Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 10/28/2007 @ 9:28pm

    and thats just what we know...lol

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 9:37pm

34. wow...some of which was justified...but enough of which was not to make my point...thanks.

    Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 10/28/2007 @ 9:28pm

    oh yeah. sometimes there's no other choice.

    but sometimes............................

    Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2007 @ 9:41pm

35. Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 10/28/2007 @ 9:41pm |

    yup...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/28/2007 @ 9:44pm

36. Posted by HAPPY 10/28/2007 @ 9:19pm

    is this what you want to fund? [blogs.abcnews.com]

    Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2007 @ 9:47pm

37. ...is this what you want to fund? [blogs.abcnews.com]

    Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 10/28/2007 @ 9:47pm

    According to the abcnews account, the group had targeted Iranian military and officials, which would be fine IF we have an officially sanctioned program to support Iranian dissidents. In the case cited, apparently the US is not involved funding-wise.

    As I read and finished article, my thoughts were immediately captured by the very first comment.....nothing was said of what the group's objectives were!

    Thanks for the link.....

    Posted by Happy at 10/28/2007 @ 10:22pm

38. Desperate Rudy: Well, before spitting on the Clintons, Giuliani should look at his own messes: (no less than) three wives, one of whom played in no less than "vagina monologue" , and sons and daughters that couldn't love even their own father. Spiteful? Yeah, if you're southerner. Read this.

    -----------

    Giuliani blasts Clinton By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer Sun Oct 28, 3:22

    PETERBOROUGH, N.H. - Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani on Sunday blasted Hillary Rodham Clinton for talking about what she would do on the diplomatic front between her possible election and inauguration.

    Posted by HelenDAO at 10/28/2007 @ 11:10pm

39. This, HAPPY, is what is meant by "pandemonium in the oil markets": a literal convulsion as the world's biggest sea route for oil is suddenly and indefinitely shut down due to disastrous military confrontation.

    Posted by ZERO 10/28/2007 @ 10:52pm

    Don't take my playing the `Devil's advocate' for wanting war w/Iran!

    Here's the deal, as I see it: For now, the Bruhaha is centered between the US (and Israel if AIPAC is as mighty as some think) and Iran.

    Now, IF Iran shuts down the Strait and/or destroys Saudi oil fields/facilities, it is essentially declaring war on the world, particularly Europe and Asia which depend on Persian Gulf output far, far more than the U.S. Question for Iran is, is it prepared to be annialated economically and the government for sure, to fall? According to some of Ahma-Dine-in-your-Jeans' speeches, one can't really be sure....but I'd think cooler, less visible (but more powerful) heads in Iran know better.

    Now, assuming Iran do shut down shipping for some weeks while its military capabilities are destroyed, oil prices will for sure, shoot skyward in a typical knee-jerk reaction triggered mostly by financial players (ie: speculators). The worlds' inventory of crude reserves are quite high...additionally, most country has their own Strategic Reserves--with the US having something like over 700 million bbls., enough to replace two full months of imports if not another drop entered our country from the time the Strait is closed. In reality, a lot of crude oil are always on the Seven Seas in hundreds of tankers enroute to market or storage. Another word, for quite a few weeks, the practical effect is ZERO....there need NOT be total panic in the oil market if coordinated releases of Reserves, private & governmental, are expedited to kick in when the last few tankers from the Strait unloads.

    Now, if Iran can somehow keep the Strait closed for several months, then I can see drastic measure being taken...rationing and such....replays of the `73 & `79 embargo. IMO, this scenario is highly unlikely....Iran will have ceased to be a functioning country!

    This is high-stakes "gambling" and both sides have surely thought of all possibilities. Question is, which side has got more to lose? or, to gain?

    Again, I'm NOT war-mongering....just some "war-gaming"! Don't pull a MASK on me!

    Posted by Happy at 10/28/2007 @ 11:52pm

40. Want crazy:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIO-tCPSfHA

    Posted by hsuBfools at 10/29/2007 @ 12:07am

41. Podhoretz is a thug! Always has been one! He has always wanted to be tough, having been picked on by blacks as a boy in Brooklyn and in dreams by goyim in his shtetl. This is the kind of Jews that the Israel Lobby loves.

    Posted by torquemada at 10/29/2007 @ 08:35am

42. Posted by TORQUEMADA 10/29/2007 @ 08:35am

    TORQ, does it worry you at all to sound like (and be preceded by).....a true neo-Nazi like MARKCANYON?

    Posted by Mask at 10/29/2007 @ 09:09am

43. Posted by MASK 10/29/2007 @ 09:09am |

    some years ago i was teaching a kid whose parents forced him to take spanish instead of german because he was into the neo-nazi stuff and well, you know...

    so he was not doing to well, since he didn't want to be there learning "the spic language". but, being a good teacher i tried to teach to his interest and assigned him reports on franco and the the spanish inquisition...

    well, he still wasn't thrilled, but at least he respected my whiteness and developed enough respect for the long jew hating aspect of spanish civilization to buck up and pass the course!

    i think he settled down later and altered his views...or learned to hide them better...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/29/2007 @ 10:35am

44. Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 10/29/2007 @ 10:35am

    I think MARKHIMMLER has GOT to be a kid...teenager, probably, but no older than 22-23. Flirting with neo-Nazism and then ALSO claiming to be a "leftist" smells of somebody who is not only immature, but confused as hell.

    Remember he started his time with us on BLOG | Posted 10/05/2007 @ 5:23pm --Prison Reformers Finally Set Free by Matthew Blake with an ENDORSEMENT of the Holocaust--

    "For one bright moment that came to view well enough in Europe when there were no people of color to confuse the picture. Then the right people, for once, were locked up, and put on Death Row, and sent to gas chamber. For a short moment the picture was clear and honest folks knew what to do."----Posted by MARKCANYON 10/06/2007 @ 1:15pm)

    If he had been an "older, more mature" Nazi sympathizer, he'd have been more subtle, using David Duke code-words and such.

    But I think MARK's a skin-head wannabe...probably not the real deal. So maybe he'll grow out of it. In the meantime, maybe we can all chip in and buy him a copy of "American History X"?

    Posted by Mask at 10/29/2007 @ 11:15am

45. Posted by MASK 10/29/2007 @ 11:15am |

    hee hee...might be that ex student of mine...lol...about in that age range now i think...wonder if he remembers any of his spic talk...

    oh man...thank god i'm out of ejucayshun...much prefer counciling the wackos to trying to teach them...phew!

    actually the neo-nazi, other than being a neo-nazi, was a good kid from a wacko family.

    latino gang kids were almost always good kids in class too...they'd do horendous things to each other out of class, but generally respectful to teachers in-class. only had a prob with one, and that ended after i talked to some of his fellow gang members. i almost felt bad about that.

    man..i gotta write this stuff down before i block it all out...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/29/2007 @ 11:58am

46. Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 10/29/2007 @ 11:58am

    Remember "Teachers" with Nick Nolte and JoBeth Williams (another great "JoBeth gets nekkid" role)?.....with teachers DYING in the class and the students not noticing, or Richard Mulligan as an escapee from an asylum who is mistaken for a substitute and becomes not only a popular, but EFFECTIVE history teacher!

    Posted by Mask at 10/29/2007 @ 12:05pm

47. Posted by MASK 10/29/2007 @ 12:05pm

    lol - thats a classic...thank god never had a death in class...just one miscarriage and a 2nd story jumper...

    "man, this place is a prison...i'm bustin' out!"

    kid jumped, i freaked...last i saw he was bookin' toward the tree line. when the kids asked if he were alright i said "well, PHYSICALLY he's fine..." i think he found out what a real prison was like later...

    yeah...i gotta write this stuff down...you cant make it up...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/29/2007 @ 12:14pm

48. oh yeah, and a couple of seizures...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/29/2007 @ 12:15pm

49. Well, big ups to you guys who went to the "Blackboard Jungle"....

    makes Glenn Ford and Sidney Poitier look like Phillips Exeter or Andover!

    Posted by Mask at 10/29/2007 @ 12:34pm

50. KVR'S nonsense about "illegality and immorality" of keeping fanatics of ANY ilk from posessing nuc's is typical: Got no problem with that. But she is correct about ol' Norman being delusional if he truly thinks we can finish this "in five minutes". Smart Technology has proven to be anything but infallible, as our initial attempt to get Hussein quickly proved. Nor is our intelligence nearly as good as dreamers like Podhoretz thinks it is. Dude sounds dangerous.

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 10/29/2007 @ 2:31pm

51. Podhoretz's brand of Zionism, rightwing Zionism, is pretty much Jewish Fascism. Zionism is what used to be called in Europe "integral nationalism," a form of nationalism in which nothing was higher than the State or the Movement and the individual could appeal to nothing transcendant beyond the State of Movement. It was in fact the antechamber to Fascism in much of Europe. Zionism grew up in reactin to these integral nationalist theories in France, Germany, Austria and Poland. It resembles them in most ways. Podhoretz has been a Fascist in that Israel is the moral excuse for any and everything.

    Posted by torquemada at 10/29/2007 @ 2:38pm

52. Podhoretz's brand of Zionism, rightwing Zionism, is pretty much Jewish Fascism. Zionism is what used to be called in Europe "integral nationalism," a form of nationalism in which nothing was higher than the State or the Movement and the individual could appeal to nothing transcendant beyond the State or Movement. It was in fact the antechamber to Fascism in much of Europe. Zionism grew up in reaction to these integral nationalist theories in France, Germany, Austria and Poland. It resembles them in most ways. Podhoretz has been a Fascist in that Israel is the moral excuse for any and everything.

    Posted by torquemada at 10/29/2007 @ 2:39pm

53. Torquemada,

    Afternoon, this is Chip.

    I'm a student of History, and I'm strictly curious as to what made you decide on your screen name?

    Have a good day

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 10/29/2007 @ 2:45pm

54. A perfect candidate for fear mongering GOP

    Posted by kevin99999 at 10/29/2007 @ 3:34pm

55. I use the name Torquemada ironically. If you know who he was you will understand.

    Posted by torquemada at 10/29/2007 @ 3:53pm

56. TORQUE,

    Yes, I do & I understand. Unfortunately appropriate for these times. See ya

    Chip

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 10/29/2007 @ 4:02pm

57. Here ya go, CHIP and TORQUE [youtube.com]

    Posted by Mask at 10/29/2007 @ 4:41pm