Comments on: Georgia’s congressional delegation unites on Iran

By: Jerry Yeats

Jerry Yeats — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 13:00:52 +0000

It is beyond me why David S characterizes this resolution, which calls for INSPECTIONS, as “support [for] the mass killing of millions.” Fact is, this was not a war-drum resolution. John Lewis is a pacifist, for goodness’ sake. Lynn Woolsey from California is a cosponsor — she’s one of the strongest voices for peace in Congress. Gimme a break. Sorry, no conspiracy here.

By: David S

David S — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 00:41:59 +0000

With GA as chronically dependent on the profits of the military industrial complex and on the disgusting influence of the military itself in this state, it is of little wonder that our congressional delegation would support the mass killing of millions of innocents over an empty case that is more full of holes than the lies and disinformation that was presented about Iraq.

If our own CIA does not consider Iran a threat, then you have to wonder who is pulling the strings of this administration and the worthless government media. It is the military industrial complex as always. We respect Eisenhower, but pay no attention to his warnings.

As the blood of Iranians and thousands of americans flows in the streets, the same players will be rolling in the dough as always.

You democrats who were so upset at Bush, have nobody but yourselves to blame when this horrible administration commits their own war crimes in your name. You republicans are beyond hope and have been since 9-11.

By: RetiredSoldier

RetiredSoldier — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 17:10:45 +0000

jconservative-

What does the draft have to do with this? Do you not like the all volenteer military? Or is it you don’t like the military and wish to make it a political pawn.

If it is not broke we don’t need you to fix it.

By: Jerry Yeats

Jerry Yeats — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 14:31:53 +0000

The real story here is that Republicans got onboard with a Democratic, pro-diplomacy resolution. Kudos to Mr. Johnson for this leadership.

Galloway, I agree with the above comment — by making this about war, you’re missing the story.

By: Bill McCoy

Bill McCoy — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 13:47:00 +0000

Jim,

You cite poll stats which indicate American willingness to make war over Iran’s nuclear program and then call Johnson’s pro-diplomacy, pro-inspections resolution evidence of that.

You’ve got it wrong. The breadth of support for the Johnson Resolution shows that Obama has the support of Congress in pursuing a diplomatic track, using inspections and sanctions. Hank’s resolution is not about war, it’s about strong inspections and negotiations.

By: Keith

Keith — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 02:18:27 +0000

And Democrats Hank Johnson, John Lewis, Sanford Bishop, and David Scott would among the first to dissent if it were determined that military action against Iran was the only course of action to stop Iran from acquiring nukes.

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 00:32:19 +0000

When the Media always covers negative coverage of Iran, no matter what the channel, offcourse the majority in any Poll would want to go to war. This is what happened in regards to Afghanistan and more importantly, Iraq.

North Korea is a greater danger to the U.S. and U.S. Interests than Iran. We should be as much concerned about North Korea as much as we are about Iran.

By: jconservative

jconservative — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 22:45:03 +0000

“And a strong majority – 61% – says that it is more important to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, even if it means taking military action.”

Question: Would the percentage change if the military said we absolutely must reinstate the draft if we use military action re Iran?

I say those wanting to use military force would drop by 50% overnight.