Neither is Carter, who lost an election because of the Mullahs.

McDermott and McKinney are to the Democratic House caucus what someone like B-1 Bob Dornan was to the Republican caucus. That is, kooky and marginalized.

My whole point was that Dems likely will not oppose the President, because Iran potentially really is a threat to regional stability and to our vital interests (unlike Saadam), potentially really is run by an irrational madmen (also unlike Saadam), and also because Bush really is unlikely to anything crazy this time (like invade and occupy the country).

By ex-Presidents, do you mean Jimmy Carter?

By Presidential candidates, which version of John Kerry are you referring to?

By members of Congress, do you mean Jim McDermott (who said that Bush=Saddam before the war with Iraq began), SEN Patty Murray (who noted that Osama bin Laden garnered support b/c his family has helped build health care centers), Sheila Lee (who couldn’t even support the war in Afghanistan), or Cynthia McKinney (who believes that Bush LIHOP)?

By ex-Presidents, do you mean Jimmy Carter?

By Presidential candidates, which version of John Kerry are you referring to?

By members of Congress, do you mean Jim McDermott (who said that Bush=Saddam before the war with Iraq began), SEN Patty Murray (who noted that Osama bin Laden garnered support b/c his family has helped build health care centers), Sheila Lee (who couldn’t even support the war in Afghanistan), or Cynthia McKinney (who believes that Bush LIHOP)?

Of course, I’m sure we’ll find out, the minute the war clouds loom on the horizon, that President Clinton, VP Gore, and National Security Advisor Berger gave BushCo detailed plans on exactly what to do and say and act on Iran, and there will be the claims that everything was working hunky-dory ’til Dubya screwed it up.

I mean, that’s SOP now, isn’t it?

“The implication is that, at some point, the Democrats would support Presidential action regarding Iran. My comment, which you seem to agree with, is that, in fact, such a point will not occur, at least regarding most Democrats, because UNSC options will never be exhausted.”

No, my implication was that most establishment Democrats (Members of Congress, Presidential candidates, DNC leaders, ex-Presidents and Vice-Presidents,etc.) will support the actions of President Bush regarding Iran…since they are likely to agree with him. This is because there is a basic consensus about what we should be done in regard to Iran, that being “whatever is possible”, both multilaterally and unilaterally. Also, a basic consensus about what CAN be done: not too damn much.

You are avoiding the question Sun-Tzu addressed to you. He asked how we, or you, would know that the UN options have been exausted, and that the time has come to stop trying to work through the UN and take unilateral action.

As best I can tell you feel that we never reached that point in our dealings with the UN over Iraq. So it would be helpful if you could explain what criteria you would use in making the determination that, in your opinion, Security Council options are exhausted.

You state

Once Security Council options are exhausted, Dems won’t have much objection to Bush “acting unilaterally”, since whatever he would contemplate doing would be small potatoes.

The implication is that, at some point, the Democrats would support Presidential action regarding Iran.

My comment, which you seem to agree with, is that, in fact, such a point will not occur, at least regarding most Democrats, because UNSC options will never be exhausted.

As important, for the “Axis of Weasels,” that same point will also never occur—for nations like Russia and China, as well as bureaucrats such as El Baradei, who apparently still opposes even referring Iran TO the UNSC, it is quite likely that there will NEVER be a point when diplomatic/UN options are exhausted.

Indeed, the two feed off each other. So long as there are substantial numbers of senior US politicians (i.e., Dems) opposing going to war, the UN will claim that its options are not exhausted. So long as the UN claims that its options are not exhausted, the Democrats will oppose US action.

And meanwhile, Iranian efforts proceed apace. Even now, we’re hearing from the arms control community (overwhelming Democrats) “So what?” In their view, even if Iran is interested in developing nukes (and their skepticism leaks through), really there’s another 10 years worth of dithering available.

Hello!
My name is Daekyung (danny) Kim, a Ph.D. student studying journalism and mass communication in Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. I am emailing to ask you to do me a favor. I am now working on my dissertation whose topic is about online political news and want to gather information about how and why Internet users are using news Web sites for political information based on an online survey.

This online survey will approximately take 15-20 minutes to complete. After collecting the data, I will draw to pick up 50 respondents among those who complete this survey and each will be given $ 10 gift card.

Would you please spend some time to fill out this survey? http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=594061481532
(please click on the address, OR if not working, copy it into the URL address)
Your experience will be very useful in understanding how politically interested online users are using online news and the consequent effect on traditional news media.

You can withdraw the survey at any time you want. All responses will be kept confidential and only be used for academic purposes. This survey has been reviewed and approved by the SIUC Human Subject Committee. So, there are no questions that may identify personal information.

Thank you very much in advance for your cooperation. Please email me back if you have further concerns or questions. Happy New Year!!

Again, I ask, under what circumstances would the UN Security Council admit to being exhausted?

Was the UN Security Council exhausted in March 2003? Was there any reason to believe that it would ever have been, viz. Iraq?

Has the UN Security Council been exhausted yet by North Korea?

Exactly how would we know that the UNSC was exhausted by Iran?