Paul Krugman (NYT via CommonDreams): Yes, he would attack Iran

[Jack Rabbit]

From The New York Times via CommonDreams.org
Dated Monday April 10

Yes He Would
by Paul Krugman

"But he wouldn't do that." That sentiment is what made it possible for President Bush to stampede America into the Iraq war and to fend off hard questions about the reasons for that war until after the 2004 election. Many people just didn't want to believe that an American president would deliberately mislead the nation on matters of war and peace.

Now people with contacts in the administration and the military warn that Mr. Bush may be planning another war. The most alarming of the warnings come from Seymour Hersh, the veteran investigative journalist who broke the Abu Ghraib scandal. Writing in The New Yorker, Mr. Hersh suggests that administration officials believe that a bombing campaign could lead to desirable regime change in Iran - and that they refuse to rule out the use of tactical nuclear weapons.

"But he wouldn't do that," say people who think they're being sensible. Given what we now know about the origins of the Iraq war, however, discounting the possibility that Mr. Bush will start another ill-conceived and unnecessary war isn't sensible. It's wishful thinking.

As it happens, rumors of a new war coincide with the emergence of evidence that appears to confirm our worst suspicions about the war we're already in.

Read more.

[babylonsister]

1. Nom. with fear in my heart. nt

[EVDebs]

2. And they give Clinton grief over 'wagging the dog'...can't wait for WWIII

[Junkdrawer]

3. The messier it gets, the more power "sensible" leaders will give Bush...

So why the hell would he be retrained? :shrug:

[tatertop]

4. k & r

[Kire]

5. Krugman always deserves an R

:kick:

[mom cat]

6. I fear the worst on this. Bush is clearly having delusions of messianic

proportions if not outright psychosis. He is in a state that is beyond reason or fear. He is the worst kind of maniac ... one who belieces his own BS.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

7. that is wild speculation

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/news_theswamp/2006/04/wild_speculatio.html

“It was just wild speculation,’’ Bush said today. “What you’re reading is just wild speculation. It happens quite frequently here in the nation’s capital.’’


Is Bush referring to his administration's investigations into Iraq's WMD program? Just asking...

[Jack Rabbit]

8. Welcome to DU, SI

!!

[Dudley_DUright]

10. Wild speculation (as anything else) is OK if you are a Republican

HI SI :hi:

[central scrutinizer]

14. no, the wild speculation happened in the oil market

Oil hit a new record today following fears of war with Iran. Some oil execs called up Bushco and said they really needed larger yachts and a fourth home in Whistler, BC now that global warming has fucked up the skiing in Aspen. So Bushco decided to rattle some sabers and cause a nice spike in oil futures. Bingo, problem solved.

[vickitulsa]

15. I just heard that GWB quote on Lou Dobbs! I usually mute the TV

fast whenever I can see the Dimson is given air time because I can't bear to hear his voice and will gladly wait to hear others quote highlights (if any) of his speeches or comments. This time I couldn't get it muted quickly enough and heard it from the horse's ass -- uh, I mean mouth ... maybe that should be horse's ass's mouth! ;)

(And no slur on equines intended!)

I thought, "Yeah, 'wild speculation', indeed! You blackhearted, devious LIAR ... you're just pissed that your plans to nuke Iran were revealed before you could act on them."

I keep saying lately that I'm afraid Bush&Co know they might be removed from office at any point now, so they're trying to do all the damage they can before that happens. That would, of course, leave any Dems elected in their wake to try to cope with the utter disasters THEY created.

After all, what have they got to lose now? Might they not be seeking to implement every wrongheaded and downright wicked policy and action they can immediately? Doesn't it appear that Repugs are well aware by now that the feeling of American citizens is turning against them more every day? Isn't it logical, then, that they would hurry-up their plans to destroy our Constitution and wreck our economy? And wreck it their policies will in the long run, I have no doubt about that.

It presents the most devious and manipulative attitude I've ever witnessed in politics -- and that's saying something! I think they hope that they can create such a nightmarish situation in this country (and around the world where they interfere) that no matter how hard Dems try to clean up their mess and restore our government's sanity, we will be bound to fail ... and thereafter they'll cry, "See! We told you the Democrats couldn't offer you anything better!"

It's a plot Machiavelli would be proud of....

[Dudley_DUright]

9. Yes he would. I don't doubt it for a minute.

I also believe they are serious thinking of using nukes as Hersh has reported. The real question is how to stop it. The problem with mass resignations of officers at the pentagon is that they can always be replaced with lower level yes men that are willing to push the button (as Robert Bork did during the saturday night massacre in the justice department during watergate).

[BrklynLiberal]

11. In "Dr.Strangelove" it was the military who was nuts.Here it is the execut

executive branch.

[The Backlash Cometh]

12. What are we waiting for?

The military is turning against Bush, the Criminal Justice System is doing its job and we have the GOP bastards on the run. WHAT ARE WE WAITING FOR?

[Jack Rabbit]

13. This is looking like Dr. Strangelove meats Wag the Dog

!!

[Jack Rabbit]

16. What are waiting for?

November.

[Rose Siding]

17. Uh oh, PK. CBS broke Abu Ghraib

as Hersh notes here:

snip>
After the story broke on CBS last week, the Pentagon announced that Major General Geoffrey Miller, the new head of the Iraqi prison system, had arrived in Baghdad and was on the job. He had been the commander of the Guantánamo Bay detention center. General Sanchez also authorized an investigation into possible wrongdoing by military and civilian interrogators.

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact

Hersh did killer investigative work in fleshing it out, but CBS broke it with the pix from the whistleblower's dvd.

[necso]

18. Wishful thinking, indeed...

Because w is the very king of willful* acting.

And a bad time, no doubt, for divisions in the opposition.

*: Obstinately bent on having one's own way; done deliberately or knowingly and often in conscious violation or disregard of the law, duty, or the rights of others.

[rodeodance]

19. Would Bush need another 'use of force' from Congress?

[dragonlady]

25. Maybe not

Someone I heard yesterday on Wisconsin Public Radio (maybe it was Krugman himself) said he may not need another resolution. Congress should get busy and look up the word "repeal" in the dictionary.

[bklyncowgirl]

20. This is madness. Bush must be stopped.

If Bush decides to attack Iran, the Republicans will follow Bush over the cliff and enough of the Democrats will do the same to give him the ability to claim a bipartisan consensus.

Our political system is broken.

[Notoverit]

21. Misleading headline: W not Krugman!

Other than that, excellent as usual!

[Seabiscuit]

22. My first thought as well. n/t

[Jack Rabbit]

24. My apologies

I can see where it might be misconstrued.

For several years, I have posted articles with the title in the same format: Author (publication): Title

In this case, I can see where it is confusing and should have edited the title for clarity to Yes, Bush would invade Iran.

[KAT119]

23. K&R!

[katty]

26. agree Krug-yes, he would...fool us once,twice..over&over again