Audio: Mike Gravel blows the lid off the neocon conspiracy to seize Iran’s oil
posted at 3:51 pm on July 2, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The nutroots love him, partly in an ironic way because he’s such a kooky old codger and partly in an earnest truth-to-power way because he’s willing to apologize for the terrorists who run Iran more shamelessly than, say, John Edwards, who’s still sufficiently “mainstream” that he’s relegated to the two-step of insisting that the military option must remain on the table even though there are no foreseeable circumstances in which we might actually use it.
No such straddles here for wavy Gravy. The beauty of the clip is that everyone will have a different favorite moment from it. Mine is where he scoffs at the links between Iran and Hezbollah.
Exit question: Iran hasn’t attacked anyone in a hundred years? Really?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Honestly, who’s scarier, Mike Gravel or Ron Paul?
Damian G. on July 2, 2007 at 3:52 PM
Maybe he meant this millenium.
lorien1973 on July 2, 2007 at 3:53 PM
Well damn, they can’t refine it into gasoline, so why not?
Speakin’ of Iran, I just read that we’re now destroying our retired F-14s because we’re afraid Iran might … get this … might STEAL them for spare parts! Yeah, they’re gonna sneak into the boneyard and fire up a few of ‘em and fly ‘em back to Iran for spare parts for *their* F-14s! Hey, I’ve got an idea, why don’t we destroy IRAN’S F-14s and put ours in Museums?! What the f&#*???
Tony737 on July 2, 2007 at 3:56 PM
who does the public take more seriously between the two? Paul as third party/perot candidate puts Hillary/obama/gore in whitehouse so I’ll go with Ron Paul.
after reading Paul’s page after page of Pork request for latest budget, then the fact he voted against it knowing full well it would pass anyway. I’m starting to think Paul may be less nuts and more pandering to his nut and clueless supporters who like his talking points. Usually a political MO of the “Do as I Say, not as I do” libs.
jp on July 2, 2007 at 3:57 PM
Damian G. on July 2, 2007 at 3:52 PM
That would be Ron Paul, Ron doesnt have a prayer in hell of getting elected, but his chances are about a million times better than Mike Gravel’s.
doriangrey on July 2, 2007 at 3:57 PM
I think you missed the symbolism.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on July 2, 2007 at 4:07 PM
This nobody probably hasn’t gotten the message about the new Iran-Venezuela pact to destroy “imperialism” either.
We live in very dangerous and also extremely amuzing times.
You’re making way too much sense my friend. You show convictions similar to Mrs. Edwards now :)
Entelechy on July 2, 2007 at 4:10 PM
Where may I find this?
Keljeck on July 2, 2007 at 4:21 PM
Gravel was lucky Brian hardly let him talk or he would have made an even bigger fool of himself.
Dusty on July 2, 2007 at 4:24 PM
the neocon conspiracy to seize Iran’s oil
Cool! Let’s just hope we do a better job of stealing their oil than we did in Iraq.
I just spent three bucks and change per gallon, I wants me some of that neo-con oil!
Drew on July 2, 2007 at 4:27 PM
Can we send him a head of lettuce as well?
subbottomfeeder on July 2, 2007 at 4:28 PM
That was unlistenable drivel. White noise is more coherent. My favorite part was when it stopped.
Thomas the Wraith on July 2, 2007 at 4:30 PM
My favorite part was where clicking on the white x in the little red square made him shut up.
TunaTalon on July 2, 2007 at 4:32 PM
#1: Gravel’s name has gone to his head.
#2: I second the “destroy Iran’s F-14’s and keep ours” plan.
It makes me sick to see the last remaining examples of one of the most beautiful machines every made ground up like a bunch of classic musclecars in a California “smog abatement” program.
I’ve wanted my own F-14 since I before I can remember. I had an F-14 toy I cuddled like a teddy bear when I was a baby (long before “Top Gun”).
I’m going to go curl up into a fetal position now.
Merovign on July 2, 2007 at 4:35 PM
NBC Fred to announce after July 15?
lorien1973 on July 2, 2007 at 4:36 PM
That’s a little late, Fred. Some of us are tired of the will he/won’t he game.
lorien1973 on July 2, 2007 at 4:37 PM
db on July 2, 2007 at 4:40 PM
Next year Gravel’s new buddy will give him some relaxercising lessons.
Stephen M on July 2, 2007 at 4:43 PM
We don’t buy or use Iranian oil, it goes to the Europeans and Far East.
Canada’s and Mexico’s oil would be cheaper and easier to take if that were the plan.
Smaller armies to defeat and less travel time to get there. (Plus the amazing element of surprise.)
Somebody call this clown’s children. He needs his meds.
profitsbeard on July 2, 2007 at 4:47 PM
Didnt we allready fly all of our F-14’s into buildings in N.Y. city???
F8T8W on July 2, 2007 at 4:48 PM
How come so many Republicans are lefties? What happened?
It’s funny, we already have a lefty Republican in office, and here we have another lefty Republican accusing him of being an extreme righty wanting to take America to the Left. And waiting in the wings, we have the Democrat lefties just itching to take over from all those lefties.
Lefties to my left, lefties to my right, stuck in the middle with Fred.
jihadwatcher on July 2, 2007 at 4:48 PM
Ron Paul’s hypocrisy uncovered:
Ron Paul: 65 pages of Pork request for last budget
which he went on to vote against, being the ‘fiscal hawk’ and all that he ‘is’….of course we all know he knew full well the budget would pass with his no vote and he would get his Pork.
also see Ace on this…
jp on July 2, 2007 at 4:51 PM
…or maybe they’ll sneak in there and just steal the parts they need rather than the whole jet?
Mazztek on July 2, 2007 at 4:52 PM
db-
Thanks for the “shred the jets” link.
Couldn’t they just remove the F-14’s “spare parts” innerds and give the classic shells to VFW posts to park on their front lawns?
This sounds like our standard stupid government doing its usual best to be purblind morons, by destroying part of our military history and costing us beaucoup tax dollars for the honor of being royally reamed.
Who approved this lamebrained project?
profitsbeard on July 2, 2007 at 4:54 PM
also, if that is all you have to do to get earmarks in the Budget, Hotair should send a request to them in next budget. Just a paragraph, wisely worded to fund some type of “research”…i.e. hotair.com
jp on July 2, 2007 at 4:54 PM
Looks like he didn’t take his own advice.
Don’t take the brown acid.’
there it is on July 2, 2007 at 4:57 PM
Oh, our desire not to get into WWII is a “canard”?
/I gather he’s not referring to the foreplanes on the old Curtiss XP-55 Ascender.
He “doesn’t want to go back to the past”
/Except in how we handle terrorism (which failed miserably, in case he hadn’t noticed), and in whining about all the evil we did in the ’50s, and of course how “they” stole the elections in 2000 and 2004
We “can’t criticize” the Iranian election
/When Ahmedinejad was the only one on the ballot
And of course
Those never-to-be-sufficiently d**ned Neo-Cons were plotting in 1997 to invade Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Syria to grab all the world’s oil supply
/Is he talking about the Neo-Cons in the Clinton Administration?
Oh, please, Senator Gravel-Head, run for President.
You are a perfect example of what’s wrong with your party.
cheers
eon
eon on July 2, 2007 at 5:04 PM
Thank you very much so. I just wish he said how much money he wanted, instead of just asking for money.
Keljeck on July 2, 2007 at 5:07 PM
We are going to steal iran’s oil by linking up to the secret oil pipeline Bush/Cheney invaded Afghanistan to build. Because it was so much easier and cheaper to invade a country and occupy it (for years) than just buying Iran’s oil output on the open market.
Neo on July 2, 2007 at 5:12 PM
it would be nice if someone could find out how much of the last budget poured into his district? How can you find this out?
jp on July 2, 2007 at 5:14 PM
Didn’t Iran attack Iraq before? I guess Mike does not remember that when he says Iran has not attacked anyone in the past 100+ years.
Also he must not be a fan of Jimmy Carter since it was his admin that installed the bad men, and I some how doubt it was for oil.
jharada on July 2, 2007 at 5:30 PM
Mazz, that’s my point, ya can’t sneak through airport checkpoint with a big old Pratt and Whitney under your shirt.
This is why we should NEVER sell our top of the line fighters to muslim countries. We sell F-15s to the Saudis and now we’re gonna sell F-35s to Turkey. “But they’re our friends” Yeah, so were the Iranians, and their Tomcats are NOT stealth like the F-35! Turkey could turn on us at any moment, just like when they didn’t let go through there to invade Iraq. I don’t trust ‘em. And God forbid the Saudis turn on us and our F-22s hafta shoot down their Eagles!
Tony737 on July 2, 2007 at 5:40 PM
Don’t worry Tony, it will come down to the pilot in a fight between equal planes. And keep in mind, all that high-tech stuff needs lots of parts and maintainance. They still need the US for that. Kind of like sending in your iPhone to be recharged every six months. I don’t like the idea of selling muslims anything, but a muslim in the cockpit of an F-35 doesn’t scare me as much as it makes me laugh.
“Which button is to release the bombs, in this dirty infidel contraption, oh allah most merciful?! I forgot! Damn the kuffar. It is up to God now! Inshallah!”
Ejection seat button pressed instead.
“halalalalalalalal!!!!”
jihadwatcher on July 2, 2007 at 7:11 PM
I sure do wish some of these various “neocon conspiracies to seize X’s oil” would actually result in our seizing the bloody oil.
I’m a little uneasy about Turkey’s involvement in the F-35 program, too. As for Saudi Arabia’s F-15’s, and for that matter Eurofighters (which are on order) I don’t think the F-22 is at a disadvantage. (The “Super”hornet, on the other hand, would have to take considerable care when dealing with several of the more modern European exports.)
But face it, if Saudi Arabia goes so far down the hole that we’re engaging its air force, the world will be screwed on so many levels it’s hard to fixate especially much on air superiority. Finding fuel for the fighters in the first place would present challenges aplenty (not to mention $20 a gallon pump prices back home).
Blacklake on July 2, 2007 at 8:00 PM
True, but that’s not the real concern. The real concern would be brand new F-35’s being disassembled for reverse-engineering in China and Russia (the fate that supposedly befell several Iranian F-14’s, and their at-the-time world-beating radar, in the USSR).
Blacklake on July 2, 2007 at 8:07 PM
There is no secret technology in those planes that is not known to the Chinese or the Russians. It is long-understood technology that nonetheless requires specialized skills and machines to make work and to keep them working. China can reverse engineer a Cadillac, but they still can’t make one.
jihadwatcher on July 2, 2007 at 8:26 PM
I don’t know that, do you?
head, meet sand.
moflicky on July 2, 2007 at 9:07 PM
I’m just not digging it. The host has such a snotty tone to every word coming out of his mouth. It’s not fun to listen to.
tlynch001 on July 2, 2007 at 9:32 PM
jharada on July 2, 2007 at 5:30 PM
I believe Iraq attacked Iran. Still, does the stomring of our embassy and taking of 140 or so hostages not register as an attack?
VolMagic on July 2, 2007 at 10:20 PM
I’m not sure what plane you’re thinking about, but it isn’t the F-35. The data-linking and other avionics advances present in those airplanes will be well beyond the technological prowess of either Russia or China.
It’s true that China and Russia would not be able to duplicate the planes. But they could still learn a great deal that would nevertheless allow them to a) improve their own planes to varying degrees (as the Soviets did with F-14 tech), b) possibly glean new information about techniques for mass-production of advanced aircraft, and, most importantly, c) develop countermeasures focused very specifically at the idiosyncratic weaknesses of the planes.
Most importantly, having planes on hand to test for radar returns could enable either Russia or China to locate “weak” spots or other obscure artifacts of the plane’s emissions and/or radar-reduction properties that could allow them to develop operational tactics with enhanced effectiveness at countering the planes. Worse, they could customize SAM systems to also exploit similar discoveries. And those SAM systems could (and would) then be exported virtually anywhere and everywhere.
Needless to say, while it’s unlikely Russian or Chinese-built F-35 clones would ever appear in the skies, nothing but bad could come of it anyway.
Blacklake on July 2, 2007 at 10:25 PM
This is why I can’t discuss anything with a liberal/socialist/marxist/etc… They are all like Gravel. Makes my head swim.
nottakingsides on July 2, 2007 at 10:31 PM
We need not worry that China will have a fighter parity just because we sell a few F-35s to Turkey. We shouldn’t sell anything to Turkey, not even bandages, but the salient point is that the US government does not export truly sensitive military technology, not even to allies, nor does it allow any American company to do so, in accordance with the 1993 Wassenaar Agreement. For example, Boeing got into trouble last year for exporting technology that was found in the 787 airliner simply because a few components were also found in the B-2. Whatever the Turks get would be classified as open-source, so to speak.
The really sensitive technology is far beyond anything the military even admits it has. It usually admits to technology about 20-25 years after developing it.
jihadwatcher on July 2, 2007 at 11:01 PM
I not only admitted that China would not achieve fighter parity if they obtained copies of the F-35, I emphasized it. If you re-read what I actually wrote, my predominant concern was that China and/or Russia would likely be able to develop tactics and SAM systems that would exploit F-35 vulnerabilities they would otherwise be incapable of knowing about. That they could also learn things to improve their own aircraft (though not achieve parity) is a less troubling issue.
As for what Turkey is going to get out of the program, I fear it’ll be a more sophisticated aircraft than you seem to believe. The plane isn’t being built by us then sold after the fact to Turkey; rather, Turkey is an invested co-developer of the aircraft as of 2002, as well as a NATO ally. I don’t expect the Turkish planes will necessarily be identical to, say, the USAF version, but I’ve seen nothing to suggest they will be hamstrung in their capabilities. The airframe, engine, radar, datalinks, countermeasures, etc. will be representative of those in all F-35A’s.
The cost of new aircraft development has become so enormous that the Pentagon is now in the unenviable position of not being able to play as close-to-the-chest with emerging technology as it once did. International funding has become a virtual necessity, and international partners are not particularly eager to invest in “castrated” weapon systems.
Hopefully, however, this is all moot, and no Islamist movement will seize power in Turkey (and if they should, it would certainly be interesting to see how NATO as a whole would respond).
Blacklake on July 2, 2007 at 11:29 PM
Ahem…being in the acquisition stream for the F-35, I can say with confidence that there will be divergent capabilities between the US versions and the various (not even all allies are equal) international versions. Turkey’s ‘invested co-developer’ status means they will have a hand in their own version, not ours.
As for the F-14s, they weren’t stealing the parts…they were legally purchasing them because lazy coding of the technical data more than 30 years ago allowed them to be sold on the open market without first being demilitarized.
James on July 3, 2007 at 8:52 AM
Interpretation of Gravels’ comments : “America wrong, right or wrong.”
captivated_dem on July 3, 2007 at 9:35 AM
Comment pages: