With Iran in the news, the Senate Intelligence Committee chaired by Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., should be deeply engaged in the question of what weapons Iran has and when it might go nuclear, right? Right? But “we have not made the progress on our oversight of Iran intelligence, which is critical,” Roberts says in the current U.S. News & World Report, also complaining about Democrats who are “more focused on intelligence failures of the past.” Yes, Americans are eager to see the committee’s long-awaited review of prewar intelligence on Iraq’s weapons threat. But they also should be able to count on Roberts’ committee to work on more than one threat at a time.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- DorisKing on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- george on Health care reform would save state money
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- Politico on So they said
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- JWink on Health care reform would save state money
- Politico on Health care reform would save state money
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
32 Comments
It may be time to put ole Pat out to pasture. He is not pulling the load that he was elected to do.
Roberts is doing his job extremely well – that job is to protect Bush from any real investigation.
If we examined the bush past failures, we wouldn’t be getting ready to repeat them! Kansas needs to send Roberts a message this election year, that just because you’re repub., you’re not safe.
Once again, with feeling…
If roberts is bush’s senator, and brownback is god’s senator, who represents kansas?
Todd Tiahrt! … oops, he represents Boeing …
Steve,
Ol’ Rubber Stamp isn’t running this year. Senators only stand for re-election every 6 years.
Tiahrt is though, and he’s backed Bush as much as it’s possible to do so.
I know the guy who’s going to run against Tiahrt. My suggestion to him is to run on the slogan, “Had Enough?”
It is called partisan politics.
You liberals think Bush is a criminal and “the worst President ever”
While the conservatives don’t.
Sorry, that we just don’t simply comply with your burning Bush at the stake.
If anything I would say we are fortunate to have Roberts where he is so that Bush won’t be subjected to a bunch of crap.
Add “where are those Tanker jobs?”
Ben,
Tiahrt tried to get us those tanker jobs.
There just so happens to be several hundred other people in Congress involved in the process too.
It is not like Tiahrt did not try.
He represented to the voters that because of his position in the Party in Power and being close to Bush (who calls him Tanker Todd) that he would get those pork-barrel jobs. What happened? Going to blame that on the Democrats?
Ben,
Trying to do something and failing is not a lie or a broken promise.
It didn’t happen.
Ben, sometimes you are so obtuse.:)
It is CLINTON’S FAULT.
In that case it is simply an indication that he was ineffectual. Perhaps he should have been a bit less certain of himself when he made his representations of his power due to his seniority and being ensconced in the party in power.
It’s time to “term-limit” Tanker Todd.
Roberts will peruse the intelligence on Iran.
But we have to get the bombing done first.
That’s how it works with “pre-emptive” war.
The tanker-lease deal was an expensive boondoogle anyway. Granted, fighting for local pork that hurts the country isn’t a phenom limited to Repubs or conservatives. If it’s YOUR district it’s “pork”; if it’s mine, it’s “bacon”!
What else has Toddy done, other than bash our Consitution, kiss W.’s backside, and participate in the full-on graft-fest. . .when he’s not trying to tell the rest of us how we should live?
Ben, I agree. Term limits =
NO INCUMBENTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
“Perhaps he should have been a bit less certain of himself when he made his representations of his power due to his seniority and being ensconced in the party in power”
You know in texas, we said that was “letting your aligator mouth over load your tadpole brain”!
The only thing funnier is the voters falling for it. Repeatedly!
Nathan only cares about politicians’ INTENTIONS.
“Tanker Todd TRIED, he really TRIED.” “The Israelis don’t want to kill civilians, but sometimes they accidentally kill them.”
News flash–people who are “accidentally killed” are just as dead as the people who are intentionally killed. Likewise, failure to deliver is failure, whether someone wanted to or not.
Let’s elect people who don’t kill anybody, accidentally or not, and people who can get the job DONE, not the ones who are content to merely try . . .
Ya know, this is the wing-nuts big complaint against liberal opposition to the war–”you people WANT the US to fail in Iraq.”
As if somehow the war would be going better if we all loved Bush, nay WORSHIPPED HIM, just as much as they do.
The outcome of the Iraqi conflict has nothing to do with how much you or I WANT something . . . duh.
Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., needs to get-off his G-d ass and extract that lunatic in the White House; George W. Bush.
Until the removal of Bush is done, there is no other business.
Bush is firmly in the grasp of PNAC, whose grandiose plans of world conquest for Israel is progressing through the Middle East like a rabid cancer.
In American democracy we vote in representatives to first secure this country and our Homeland Security is nothing more than a joke…a ridiculous bureaucratic joke against an invented, nonexistent diversion called “terrorism” { the misnomer used for Arab retaliation against Zionist-Jews 60 years worth of absolute brutality in the Middle East.
Bush’s condition goes well beyond just bad judgment and screaming into mental illness. The man is insane.
Bush position as president puts him in charge of the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons this world has ever known and with his unstable mind creates the most dangerous condition this country and this world has ever faced.
Also his handlers, those making his decision for him are starting to have him use the word “Decider” when reporters trap into giving a straight answer to a question.
That “Decider” answer is a direct reference to his ability to use nuclear weapons to further the goals of people who are actually enemies of the United States but pretend to be allies.
Bush is by far too stupid and crazy to begin to know the difference.
So, as I started, it’s time for that Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas to get-off his G-d ass and extract that lunatic in the White House; George W. Bush, before Bush destroys this country.
So much for Congress’ oversight of ANYTHING, much less of Iran.
Here’s an AMAZING speech from Ret. Lt. Gen. Bernard Odum, former NSA Director, a REAL strategic thinker. He lays it all out there. It is a devastating critique from someone in the know.
It underscores, by comparison, what feckless, shallow, and incompetent men are in charge at the moment.
http://hammernews.com/odomspeech.htm
Warning: it may make you want to hide under your chair and not come out.
The outcome of the Iraqi conflict has nothing to do with how much you or I WANT something . . . duh.
heheh. If wishes were horses, we’d all ride!
In a management class I took we discussed “GROUPTHINK.” That is what has infected the Bush administration. One of the characteristics we discussed is to brand anyone who raises objections as being “disloyal” to the organization.
sounds like meerkats to me
Did anyone see TDS last night? Here is a partial transcript of their take on us nuking iran.
Rumsfeld: Henny penny the sky is falling…
Rummy used the same expression when talking about early reports of violence in Iraq back on April, 11th 2003. Guess what that means?
Stewart: Holy crap we’re going to war with Iran…
The pounding of the war drums is getting louder, and as Yogi Berra once said, it’s deja vu all over again.
The similarities between the run up to our invasion of iraq and the current run up to nuking iran can be found here:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2006/04/21/iran/index_np.html
And we have pat roberts in charge of oversight? ROFLMAO.
Thanks for the link, CF. Lots of good stuff there. Unlike you, I am not above quoting some of my favorite bits. :)
‘Even if the invasion had gone well, Odom says it wouldn’t have mattered: “The invasion wasn’t in our interests, it was in Iran’s interest, Al Qaida’s interest. Seeing America invade must have made Iranian leaders ecstatic. Iran’s hostility to Saddam was hard to exaggerate.. Iraq is now open to Al Qaida, which it never was before- it’s easier for terrorists to kill Americans there than in the US.. Neither our leaders or the mainstream media recognize the perversity of key US policies now begetting outcomes they were designed to prevent… 3 years later the US is bogged down in Iraq, pretending a Constitution has been put in place, while the civil war rages, Iran meddles, and Al Qaida swells its ranks with new recruits.. We have lost our capacity to lead and are in a state of crisis- diplomatic and military.”’
‘The fixation on spreading democracy was wrongheaded. “Holding elections is easy, creating stable constitutional orders is difficult. Only 8-9 of 50 new democracies created since the 40’s have a constitutional system. Voting only ratifies the constitutional deal that has been agreed to by elites- people or groups with enough power- that is guns and money, to violate the rules with impunity… Voting does not cause a breakthrough… One group will win out and take them off the path to a liberal breakthrough .. Spreading illiberal democracy without Constitutionalism is a very bad idea, if we care about civil liberties. We are getting that lesson again in Hamas.”…Odom sees ominous parallels with Vietnam. “How did we get in the (Vietnam) war? Phony intelligence over the Tonkin Gulf affair. Once we got in, it was not legitimate to go back and talk about strategic purpose, we were only allowed to talk about how we were doing- the tactics. We would not go back and ask whether this was in our interests. I see the pattern so clearly here. We have Iraqization- if they stand up, we’ll stand down. Training troops is not the problem. Political consolidation, not military consolidation, is the issue. Unless troops know to whom they should be loyal, they’ll fight some days, not others (and maybe against the wrong side).”
“If they (military power) get ahead of political consolidation, we know what happens then- a military coup.”’
‘A reporter’s question about the benefits of an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities provoked a fervent response. “I think we could have a rapprochement with Iran. You do that and you put it off for another 20 years. You want to be at war with all the Muslims forever?” Regarding a nuclear terrorist attack on a US city, “It’s gonna be bad. But they won’t kill us with one nuke. We can track a nuke back to the country where it came from (at least the fissile material, if there is a recorded elemental signature). These people know that! If we deterred the Soviet Union, think we can’t deter these pipsqueaks? We’re talking ourselves into hysteria. Now we have the incentives so structured that we cause proliferation.. If we bomb, good God man, that tells everyone in the world, get a nuke. We won’t bomb you if you have a nuke.”’
“But they also should be able to count on Roberts’ committee to work on more than one threat at a time.”
But, don’t you have to have two parts of a brain, left and right, to multi-task? Pat’s only got the right part, which, for us, is the wrong part. My personal opinion is he has no parts but has instead a 8 bit hard drive preprogrammed by Bushco.
More on CF’s links to Gen. Odom’s comments:
It’s always amazed me that the neocons ask Americans to support their long-term “thinking” by offering short-term solutions, i.e., (from the article) “it’s easier for terrorists to kill Americans there [Iraq] than in the US.”
I agree that replacing civilians with US soldiers in the firing line is wise, but the long-term promise implicit in doing so is not 24/7 war without end.
In other words, the president wisely bought time for US civilians, but in doing so he promised to solve the problem of Islamic terrorism. That’s a problem that may not be solvable by military means only. In fact, the way the president chose to wage war in Iraq has burned a LOT of bridges of the diplomatic variety, leaving us with mostly military options.
In fact, President Bush’s administration is probably limited to military options exclusively; real American diplomacy probably is a non-starter until we have our own regime change.
See the rest of Odom’s comments for a very long list of additional errors made by President Bush, errors that just may negate that promise he made.
Funny Walker!
Kansas ANG, done deal, was to get the T-38s for training,what happened?As I see it there are a couple of major problems that need to be solved and solved as soon as possible. The first one, Iran, with the potential to become a terrorist-sponsoring nation with the BOMB. The second, North Korea and its nuclear arsenal. Without declaring war on these countries, our only hope to bring these nations in line is China. The Chinese Government must put pressure on these Governments to give up their pursuit of nuclear weapons. Chinese President Hu Jintao basically told President Bush to go to hell; he was not going to help us. The only thing left is to cancel all trade agreements with China and impose a 75% tariff on all goods manufactured in China and sent to the United States. We, the good old USA, are their biggest customers and they cannot ignore that. Without America, where will they sell their products?
Greyfox,
I heard from someone at McConnell (AF, not KANG) that the 184th was closing and going to Topeka. Then I read in the paper that they were staying at McConnell, thanks to the T-38’s. What’s up?