Denver
42°
hide
Change your location
Alamosa
Aspen
Aurora
Boulder
Broomfield
Centennial
Colorado Springs
Cortez
Denver
Durango
Fort Carson
Fort Collins
Grand Junction
Greeley
Gunnison
La Junta
Lamar
Leadville
Limon
Montrose
Pueblo
Rifle
Saguache
Springfield
Telluride
Trinidad
hide
Blogs
Health Care
Tech Talk
Green Living
National Parks
Super School News
The 1930s
Name
e-mail
Facing the Mortgage Crisis
Colorado State of Mind - Budget Cuts to Higher Education
Women in power: what drives them to lead and what holds them back?
Public lands in the media spotlight
Native American Heritage Month
Health Care
Masterpiece Contemporary: Collision (Part 2 of 2)
Sunday at 9pm
Mystery of Chaco Canyon
Wednesday at 8pm
Movie: Harry and Tonto (1974)
Saturday at 8pm
True Whispers: The Story of the Navajo Code Talker
Tuesday at 8pm
Nova: Why Do We Dream?
Tuesday at 7pm
Should Congress Block Bush on Iran?
posted Wednesday, Nov. 21, 2007 12:46pm
See more on:
Colorado State of Mind
,
Iraq
From the November 23 program: Should Congress try to block the Bush administration from taking military action in Iran?
Tune In
Colorado State of Mind
"Farm Subsidies/Barring Bush on Iran"
Watch Colorado State of Mind
Complete episodes online.
Watch now
.
What's your point of view?
Evan
Friday, November 23, 2007 › 7:59pm
Iran sits between Iraq and Afghanistan...if anyone should be worried about the illegal use of force against their civilians, it's Iran...not the largest militarized country ever on the face of the planet. The question is, What will we do to stop the US from using nukes? Remember, the US is the only country to have used them before.
Les Jacobson
Friday, November 23, 2007 › 8:07pm
While I do NOT favor a preemptive strike on Iran, I think that Congress potentially does the country a severe disservice with this legistaltion. History shows that sabre rattling has proven to be an effective tool in making diplomacy work. Especially as we have already shown (in Iraq) that we will back up words with deed if necessary. If the Udal sponsored bill were to pass, I foresee the nuking of Los Angeles and San Francisco. And then the current crop of nay-sayers will undoubtedly be in the forefront of those accusing the President of failing to protect the country.
Suzanne Lynch
Friday, November 23, 2007 › 8:43pm
Do you ever refer to the US Constitution itself?
T. J. Dillon
Friday, November 23, 2007 › 9:17pm
Iran: your panel is superficial in discussion. They do not mention the interests of Russia, China, Israel and their potential impacts. The considerations of China pre and post 2008 Olympics;amount of Chinese take over of Islamic Sudan and its unheralded Mideast influence and impacts.
Failure of Congress to pass legislation to limit a single bill to a single subject; mentioned briefly.
T. J. Dillon
Friday, November 23, 2007 › 9:26pm
I might also add that the program. as watched weekly. present some very ill informed and very biased panelists; "unable to think outside the box."
Javascript is required to view this web page.
Evan
Friday, November 23, 2007 › 7:59pm
Iran sits between Iraq and Afghanistan...if anyone should be worried about the illegal use of force against their civilians, it's Iran...not the largest militarized country ever on the face of the planet. The question is, What will we do to stop the US from using nukes? Remember, the US is the only country to have used them before.
Les Jacobson
Friday, November 23, 2007 › 8:07pm
While I do NOT favor a preemptive strike on Iran, I think that Congress potentially does the country a severe disservice with this legistaltion. History shows that sabre rattling has proven to be an effective tool in making diplomacy work. Especially as we have already shown (in Iraq) that we will back up words with deed if necessary. If the Udal sponsored bill were to pass, I foresee the nuking of Los Angeles and San Francisco. And then the current crop of nay-sayers will undoubtedly be in the forefront of those accusing the President of failing to protect the country.
Suzanne Lynch
Friday, November 23, 2007 › 8:43pm
Do you ever refer to the US Constitution itself?
T. J. Dillon
Friday, November 23, 2007 › 9:17pm
Iran: your panel is superficial in discussion. They do not mention the interests of Russia, China, Israel and their potential impacts. The considerations of China pre and post 2008 Olympics;amount of Chinese take over of Islamic Sudan and its unheralded Mideast influence and impacts.
Failure of Congress to pass legislation to limit a single bill to a single subject; mentioned briefly.
T. J. Dillon
Friday, November 23, 2007 › 9:26pm
I might also add that the program. as watched weekly. present some very ill informed and very biased panelists; "unable to think outside the box."
THIS SITE REQUIRES JAVASCRIPT
Please enable javascript in your browser.
Leave this field empty
Name:
E-mail:
Your e-mail address will not be shown.
Comment:
characters left
We welcome your comments, and hope to host energetic, civil discussions. As you post, please keep the following in mind:
Keep your comments focused on the topic at hand.
Don't use profanity, personal attacks or hate speech.
Don't promote a business or raise money.
When all else fails, think "Golden Rule": Treat others the way you'd like to be treated yourself.
We reserve the right to remove posts that don't follow these guidelines.
Notify me when there is a new post in this thread.
Sign me up for Rocky Mountain PBS' weekly E-news.
Featured video
"Budget Cuts to Higher Education" ›
More "Colorado State of Mind" ›
Contact Us
|
Jobs
|
About Us
Copyright© 1995-2009 Rocky Mountain Public Broadcasting Network, Inc. All rights reserved.
Help
|
Privacy policy
