Is Lindsey Graham some sort of psychoparh?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Max E., Sep 19, 2013.

  1. Max E.

    Max E.

    Now he wants to strike Iran too, are there any countries that fruit cake doesnt want to bomb?

    Sen. Lindsey Graham to seek authorization for U.S. attack on Iran

    Sen. Lindsey Graham is one of the strongest advocates of an American military strike against the Assad regime in Syria. He was unhappy when President Obama decided to seek congressional authorization for an attack, and then unhappy when his fellow lawmakers voiced disapproval of the president's plan. Graham believes the diplomatic path chosen by the administration will lead to a debacle.

    Given all that, Graham now says he will work with a bipartisan group of senators to craft a resolution authorizing the president to use military force -- not against the Syrian regime but against Iran. In an appearance on Fox News' Huckabee program over the weekend, Graham argued that such a resolution is essential, because American inaction in Syria will encourage Iran to go forward with its nuclear weapon program, eventually leading toward a Mideast conflagration if the U.S. doesn't intervene.

    Sign Up for the Byron York newsletter!
    "Look how we've handled the chemical weapons threat in Syria," Graham said. "If we duplicate that with the Iranians, they're going to march toward a nuclear weapon and dare Israel to attack them. So in the next six months, our friends in Israel are going to have to take the Iranians on, unless the United States can send a clear signal to Iran, unlike what we've sent to Syria.

    "The mixed message and the debacle called Syria can't be repeated when it comes to Iran," Graham continued. "So here's what I’m going to do. I'm going to get a bipartisan coalition together. We're going to put together a use-of-force resolution allowing our country to use military force as a last resort to stop the Iranian nuclear program, to make sure they get a clear signal that all this debacle about Syria doesn't mean we're confused about Iran."

    After Graham repeated his intention to draft a use-of-force resolution, Huckabee stepped in to make sure everyone understood. "Lindsey, I want to clarify," Huckabee said. "You actually are going to seek sort of a pre-emptive approval to give the president a loaded weapon so that he feels the absolute freedom and support of a bipartisan Congress to take whatever action, including military, against Iran to prevent them from having nuclear weapons?"

    "That's exactly right," said Graham.

    Graham knows that Congress, particularly the House, was moving strongly against authorizing Obama to use force in Syria. And that was after a chemical weapons attack that clearly violated the president's "red line" in the Syrian civil war. Given that, congressional authorization for an attack on Iran seems far-fetched at best -- a reality Graham seemed to acknowledge. "I'm going to need your help, Mike," Graham said. "I'm going to need your audience's help. Every friend of Israel needs to rally behind this endeavor. Israel feels abandoned after Syria, and I want to send a signal to Tehran and Jerusalem and Tel Aviv that we're not going to leave our friends in Israel behind. And to the ayatollahs: If you march toward a nuclear weapon, all options are on the table, including the military option."

    On Capitol Hill Tuesday, Graham repeated his pledge to seek a use-of-force authorization against Iran, although he sounded a touch less assertive than in his conversation with Huckabee. "I do believe without the threat of credible military force by us, the Iranians are going to just slow-walk," Graham said, according to an account in the Hill. "So I'm trying to create the dynamic that there is bipartisan support for continued diplomacy, sanctions and the use of force as a last resort."
     
  2. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    Lindsey Graham and John McCain should be strapped to the first bomb we drop.

    Killing two birds with one stone so to speak.
     
  3. achilles28

    achilles28

    Probably. He's also a flaming homosexual whom the NSA has mountains of dirt on. Probably explains why he's one of the most hawkish members of congress. Was that sentence grammatically correct? Whom the nsa has mountains of dirt on?
     
  4. wjk

    wjk

    Yes
     
  5. wjk

    wjk

    I don't know about your explanation though it is certainly plausible (I think about the NSA and all the politicians, especially the go-along-to-get-along pubs while O man is in charge), but I did kind of wonder if he and McCain got a thing going on...they always appear together. Bobbsy twins at least. [​IMG]
     
  6. achilles28

    achilles28

    who knows. who was that other republican guy caught in the airport washroom? Then there's barny frank. call *boy* ring run out of his house...
     
  7. joederp

    joederp

    A boy named Sue (Lindsey in this case) with a manhood complex & something to prove...nah.

    Strap on your body armor & trademark dildo to your forehead, Lindsey, & catch the next flight over if you're so gung-ho about it.
     
  8. Graham was at the forefront of the Republican Revolution in 1994... so the upshot was that Family Values translated into a massive increase in people that either didn't pay income taxes or received a government check at tax time.. If Democrats tried to do that the Republicans would go batshit but Republicans do it and nobody seems to realize it happened...
     
  9. wjk

    wjk

    Like so many others, something happened to him when he went to the Senate.
     
  10. BSAM

    BSAM

    Ditto (assuming he meant psychopath.)
     
    #10     Sep 20, 2013