Thanks for posting this, Lowell. It seems the only two national voices who are mentioning Iran and the dire consequences of ignoring the possibilities are Wes Clark (of course, with all the VoteVets people like Jon Stoltz) and Jim Webb.  The rest of the country is focused on Iraq and that debacle while Bush's administration plots and plans their next moves elsewhere. 

Help be part of the solution here by making sure this vital dialog is heard.  Mainstream media failed us big time before going into Iraq (Hmmm.  Seem to recall that the same two smart men were warning against that before it happened, too).  Keep them honest now before we wake up embroiled in a bigger mess.  To find out more, look at www.stopIranWar.com and add your voice by signing the petition, writing to Warner and your Rep, and keeping it in front of the public by holding the media feet to the fire.

Thank you Lowell for posting this.  I agree with Clark completely.  He would make a great President, I believe.  He's thoughtful, intelligent, experienced, and level-headed. And I believe the rest of the world's leaders could respect and work with a man like Wesley Clark.

Repeatedly, Clark has been asked if he's running.  He always responds with "I haven't said I'm not".  His focus now is to promote this dialogue in the public sector and to work behind the scenes to keep Iran in the news. He knows the vital importance of putting first things first.  I fully believe he'll run but he knows he has to do this before he makes that move.

The field of candidates we see now will not look the same in a few months--on either side of the aisle.

This quiet conversation between Reg, Joe and Wes opens a new door. I'd like to see more like this.

I attended a forum earlier this week with Judea Pearl (New York Times Reporter Daniel Pearl's father) and Ambassador Akbar Ahmed, Professor at American University in Washington.  This topic came up, and Ambassador Ahmed made a compelling case of the dangerous global consequences that would ensue by an invasion of Iran  as the various religious sects line up in response.  Iran is primarily a Shia nation, and other Shia countries like Pakistan would immediately line up in support of Iran and see it as a threat to them as well.  This administration's failure to attempt to understand the complex cultural, religious and historic ties and disputes in the Middle East is what has caused us to be in the mess we are in currently.  Not to mention the reaction of countries like Russia and China to military intervention into the country.  This is all just terrifying and irresponsible.

Well, the congressional record for the finalized and passed HR 1591 in the Senate has been fully updated, and it shows that the Webb Amendment to prohibit the use of emergency appropriations for an attack on Iran (Amendment 692) has been withdrawn. Also, the Hagel-Webb amendment (Amendment 707) that echoed the Murtha plan that was abandoned in the House before the bill was even introduced, i.e. to use the power to regulate the armed forces to fix times of deployment, mandate minimum times before redeployment, and mandate training before deployment to theater, was also withdrawn.

This is very disappointing. Maybe Sens. Webb and Hagel knew these wouldn't pass, as the pusillanimous Senators they serve with couldn't understand the value of these two amendments. Or maybe Sens. Webb and Hagel decided to save these amendments for the regular defense appropriations bill that will be considered later in the year.

I hope we get an answer as to why the amendments were withdrawn, what the strategy is. These are important demarcations of policy, and we need to find a way to get these into law as soon as possible.

I may just be talking to myself here, but I was interested in what happened, so I called the Senator's office and spoke with two of his staff. According to them, Senator Reid was in favor  of at least the Iran amendment, but most of the amendments were withdrawn to allow the final vote to take place.

The staffer I spoke to said that the Senator is obviously very concerned with both these issues, and planned to work hard to get them in legislation either by themselves or attached to some other bill -- but that no strategy had yet been formulated on how to do so, and that the Senator was already away on travel so no further statement or answer could be given. I asked that the office consider releasing a statement regarding these two issues for further information and guidance.

Finally, I asked if the Hagel-Webb amendment had the same intent or language as Rep. Murtha's previous plan, and she said that, yes, it did.

I think both these issues -- Iran, and setting guidelines for troop rotations -- are of paramount importance, and it feels good to have a member of Congress working on our behalf on these issues.

thanks for the update.

This and Wes Clark's views need to be discussed widely.  Thanks for raising this issue.

Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO

1. Strongly supports Israel
2. Strongly supports diplomacy with Iran

at Daily Kos:

Whether Tehran was justified in taking the sailors and marines captive last week is something that can't be ascertained fairly under the circumstances. What's clear is that Iran deserves condemnation for its treatment of the 15 captives, even if that treatment doesn't measure up to some of what Yanks and Brits have done in the past four years. What's also clear is that we desperately need some mediator, someone with influence with the Iranians to urge them to put down the kerosene they keep pouring onto this crisis and figure a way to put out the fire before we all get burnt.

Mediator? I nominate Wes Clark, Jim Webb and Chuck Hagel. Road trip? :)

With the situation in Iraq, it is vital that we find a method other than war to deal effectively with Iran.  General Clark is one of the few national leaders with the knowledge and experience to understand how to use non-military options for containing Iran.  He and our Senator Webb are both providing leadership on this important international issue, and we need to support them.