Bush 'spoiling for a fight' with Iran

[Dover]

Bush 'spoiling for a fight' with Iran


Simon Tisdall
Wednesday January 31, 2007
The Guardian


US officials in Baghdad and Washington are expected to unveil a secret intelligence "dossier" this week detailing evidence of Iran's alleged complicity in attacks on American troops in Iraq. The move, uncomfortably echoing Downing Street's dossier debacle in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq invasion, is one more sign that the Bush administration is building a case for war.

Nicholas Burns, the senior US diplomat in charge of Iran policy, says Washington "is not looking for a fight" with Tehran. The official line is that Washington has made a conscious decision to "push back" against Iran on a range of fronts where the two countries' interests clash. Primarily that means Tehran's perceived meddling in Iraq, where its influence with the Shia-led government and Shia majority population appears to be increasing as Washington's weakens.

State department spokesman Sean McCormack claimed this week the administration has a body of evidence implicating Iran in sectarian attacks against Iraq's Sunni minority. "There is a high degree of confidence in the information that we already have and we are constantly accumulating more," he told the New York Times...cont'd

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldbriefing/story/0,,2002232,00.html

[illinoisprogressive]

1. Saw this on Scarborogh and I just knew it. I said it was more Bush trash

[Vinca]

18. That's when I first heard it too, and my reaction was -

here we go again. Luckily for us, no one believes His Majesty anymore and will work like hell to stop him from attacking Iran. The scary part is he'll do it anyway.

[The Backlash Cometh]

2. This is the Mother of all Wag-the-Dog scenarios.

What a bitch. Hard to believe, but Bush is just going to keep throwing wars at us to slow us down from impeaching him.

[Rude Horner]

3. "There is a high degree of confidence in the info"

Um....yeah....where have we heard THAT before. Unbelievable that nobody seems to call them on their bullshit.

[The Wizard]

4. So where are

the troops coming from: Coalition of the foolish?
Note to the Decider: The Whole World is Watching and will force the Decider to resign.
How many U.S. citizens surrounding the White House will it take to make the Chickenhawk-in-Cheif understand his reign of terror has ended?

[muntrv]

6. I say get 'em from free republic, American conservative union.

[confludemocrat]

5. They will unveil a "secret dossier"? We know all about their goddamned dossiers!

prepared under the direction of that genius Dick Cheney. And they know where to stick it

[dapper]

7. and the crap about Iran attacking the us compound

(or Iranian trained...) attacking within the US Compound killing 5 soldiers.... some believe it was an inside job?!?! Inside Washington maybe!

Someone is trying to definately wag the dog. Something smells fishy.

Dapper

[buddysmellgood]

8. Ironically, I think this is probably true. Not really much of a secret. This

document really just points out how horribly Bushco effed up. Of course the Iranians are supporting the Shia. Who would expect anything else? Bush's problem is that we don't know what he is ignoring or choosing to ignore. Actually, I take that back, we know he is ignoring just about everything.

[Cobalt-60]

9. They were lying then

And they're lying now.
I'm not even interested in the content.
We know these people lie to get war.
So no statement that might lead to war is to be believed.

[illinoisprogressive]

10. Actually, I think it's Cheney who is spoiling for a fight and Bush just nods

[kiwilover]

34. Cheney In Charge

Doesn't take much looking to see that this is Cheney running the show. The Chimp is just a pathetic figure head that's too stupid to know that he's being used1!! Frightening to think that just a few wing nuts can screw this nation up and the rest of the world. What's more frightening is the American people so willing to go along with this shit!!!

[ChicagoRonin]

11. Fool Me Twice?

I'm wondering if the "evidence" will work this time. Will raising fears about Iran, reminding everyone of 9/11, blah, blah, blah create a wave of overwhelming support for the war effort? Will it even matter, since it seems this administration will probably go ahead with their plans no matter what anyone (Congress, the American public, world opinion . . . reality) thinks.

Also wondering - has there ever been a case in history in which a country ended its engagement in a war simply because it spent itself out? I'm talking complete exhaustion of all resources - men, material, production, finances. Has it ever happened? 'Cause I think that's ultimately the only thing that might stop our current regime.

[Matilda]

15. That's an interesting analogy,

because think - Hitler and WWII. They were reduced to calling up twelve year-old boys and old men,
the people were starving, the Russians invading from the east and raping the women and killing,
and still the leadership refused to surrender. It only ended with Hitler's suicide.

If only ....

[agincourt]

12. Next up

Iranian nuclear missiles in Cuba.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

13. deja vu

what a load of......

[niceypoo]

14. Bush wants the middle east to become embroiled in total war

The neocons know that the bush presidency is bushes greatest hope for empire, I cannot fathom them wanting to go when bushes term is up. What better than a massive regional war in the middle east to give them the excuse they feel they need to cancel the election.

[Jeroen]

16. Please to meet you, hope you guess my name….n/t

[Blackbird_Highway]

17. Iran Yellow Cake!

I heard that Iran has tried to obtain Yellow Cake Uranium ore from Niger! Oh, and High Strength Aluminum tubes, too!

Don't believe one freaking word from these fascists. If Cheney said the sky was blue, I would be completely convinced it must be green.

[Union Thug]

19. BushCo: All Propaganda, All the Time...

I see. And what about those weapons of mass destruction?

[NewJeffCT]

20. This is straight out of The Onion from a few years back...

They had a headline that went something like "Iraq Exit Strategy Announced - Going through Iran."

It's scary that they have been so prophetic with satire.

[pwb]

21. and Saudi Arabia is helping the Sunnis ?

do we attack them too? probably not, and 19 of them attacked us on 911.

[muriel_volestrangler]

24. No, it's Iran helping the Sunnis too, silly

Although the Iranians were primarily in Shia areas, they were not confined to them, the US source said, implying that they had formed links with Sunni insurgents and were helping them with booby-trap bombs aimed at Iraqi and US forces, new versions of the "improvised explosive devices".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2002329,00.html

You don't think the neocons would pass up a chance to blame something on their target, just because there's no evidence for it at all, or it doesn't really make sense?

[MsMagnificent]

22. The very height of insanity

The U.S. cannot contain and keep control of the 2 Middle Eastern nations it is already in -- we are severely understaffed in both Afghanistan and Iraq and it shows to the costs of many lives of all nationalities.

Don't get me wrong, I'm against more futile bellicosity from that hellish administration in many ways, but setting aside secondary opinion pieces and think tanks, ideology and propaganda; cutting through to simple and basic logistics, my initial concern is: With what army?

What does one call going to war and having the complete wherewithal to do so, except for the main consideration of actual boots to be placed upon the ground?

The answer? It's the title of this post but it bears repeating:

The very height of insanity.

[pwb]

26. neocons think they win wars with air power alone

remember the mission accomplished banner? they really thought the war was over then. the rest is just a mess to them. they don't think we need an army, only air power.

[subterranean]

30. Yes, they thought they could win Iraq with "shock and awe"

The theory was that we would show such an overwhelming display of air power (bombing), the people would be shocked into submission and surrender to our will. I wonder if they still believe it.

[IWantAChange]

23. Is insanity an impeachable offense?

[MsMagnificent]

25. If it isn't, it should be

[wizstars]

27. No, but it might be grounds for invoking the 25th Amendment...

...against both bush AND Cheney

[BigBadJohnny]

28. Atre We To Engage Iran?

Iran is already supplying weapons and improvised explosive devices to Iraq. Iranian President Ahmadinejad has repeatedly warned that "Israel should be wiped off the Earth".
Prior to the State of The Union Address, Bush took his typical "Cowboy" position; he gave the impression, as did experts in the field, that an attack on Iran was possible, probably within the period February, 2007 - August, 2007.
In the State Of The Union Address, Bush softened his stand, indicating that "The United Nations is opposed to Iran having Nuclear Weapons".

I have written considerably more, about this important issue. To view that entire article, which Democratic Underground readers may find of interest, navigate to:
full article

[0007]

29. The propaganda is so obvious it stinks to high heaven.

The majority of the world is holding their noses.

[McCamy Taylor]

31. Why would Iran attack US troops when we are losing? How about Sunni

militia (funded by Saudi Arabia who want the US to go to war with Iran) stage a raid on a US military compound in order to blame it on Iran right before the shia have a big holy celebration in Iraq in which Sunni plan to kill a bunch of shias including Iranian pilgrims and hope to keep US troops from doing their best to protect the shias?

Saudi Arabia could easily get access to English speakers and US military uniforms and weapons, same as Iran and they have lots of reasons for wanted to sow seeds of discord between the US and Iran.

All Iran has to do is sit tight and wait for Americans to force Bush to pull out. Saudi Arabia is desperate that we not pull out. They are the ones who have to resort to the crazy stunts. Ask Dr. Kissinger.

[CJCRANE]

45. Sounds feasible.

Just like 9/11 (IMO) was a joint venture between Bushco and Saudi al-Qaeda and was blamed on Iraq (through the MSM spin machine).

[saberjet22]

32. War with Iran

What would happen if Bush ordered the troops to Iran and the Generals said no. (The army equivalent of a mutiny.) What would, or could, Bush do? Resign? Arrest everybody? I'm sure he's walking around with Captain Queeg's steel balls in his pocket.

[Aviation Pro]

33. And we're spoiling to remove this insane, psychotic man....

...from the Oval Office before he does anymore damage.

[IWantAChange]

35. After all the lies does anyone outside the 'base' believe ANYTHING they say??

[Divine Discontent]

36. but what's sick

is that the base is so arrogantly BLIND considering the disingenuous way they've treated the truth, and scared Americans, and yet they keep backing him, and they equal about 30% of Americans... seriously, how the heck can anyone support this disastrous warmongering lying fool?



www.cafepress.com/warisprofitable <<-- antibush prodem stickers/shirts

[sparerib]

37. Let's get to the bottom of it

All this banter about failed war strategies and success or failure in Iraq, too, shall pass away. And fairly quickly. The preliminary war of words and threats with Iran is building up, and soon the fireworks will start, probably with an attack by Israel on Iran's nuclear sites. Then it will be clear why we're "surging," which is really only intended to buy time until Bush is ready for the next step. Bush is accused of poor planning, but there's more planning going on than people realize. The Persian Gulf is becoming ever more important as global oil reserves run out and the Gulf becomes central to the global economy and the global political order. This war is all about control of the Persian Gulf. The attack on Iraq was step one, and it achieved the goal of positioning our troops for step two--which is "dealing with" Iran. Bush and Rumsfeld were criticized for not having an exit strategy in Iraq, but that's the point--they had no intention of exiting. They achieved their goal of getting our troops in the Gulf--now they just needed to bide their time until events were ready for step two. (While they were biding their time, it would have been nice if Iraq would have been cooperative.) All this criticism and dialogue about Iraq is causing them to expedite step two--which is why attention is being directed to Iran while we speak. The real issue is what the US role should to be in the Gulf given the global energy situation and its impact on the global economy and the global political order. Our academics, politicians and other "experts" need to be debating this issue, and the public needs to understand that this is at the bottom of what is going on.

[progressivebydesign]

38. What kind of IDIOT would start another war in the middle of a quagmire?

Oh. wait. I answered my own question. Never mind.

[katty]

39. yes, bush, Chief Idiot

[Phoonzang]

40. As idiotic and bloodthirsty as these people are..

I don't see any way they'd start a war with Iran. I mean...how? How would we possibly fight them? Besides, the admin ran out of their "political capital"? It's ridiculous. It's impossible.

Ok...if only I can manage to really convince myself of that...

[gasperc]

41. TPM has a good post on this, it up to us

we must write letters, this is on a hair trigger, is it stoppable? That's not the question, did we try everything we could to stop it.

[RaleighNCDUer]

42. Fight? What fight?

Nuke Tehran, fight's over.

[Lord Balto]

43. Where's the bloody Surgeon General?

This guy is a psycho.

[focusfan]

44. this moron shouldn't have no crediabilty

because he lied about Iraq and congress should tell him to
screw off