Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

POLL: How likely is Iran War during Bush administration?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 11:51 AM
Original message
Poll question: POLL: How likely is Iran War during Bush administration?
Both Scott Ritter and Ray McGovern have discussed the Bush administration intentions to attack and/or invade Iran, and the American Conservative magazine had an article on Cheney ordering nuke options for Iran in response to a terrorist attack whether or not Iran was responsible.


Now they are trying to blame Iran for providing weapons to the insurgency in Iraq (why didn't they do this right from the start instead of using the cartoonish Zarquawi?)


Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Not Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 11:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. And where are we going to find the troops to deploy there?
We could ask our 'coalition partners' -lol.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jhawk_tim Donating Member (73 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
2. Baited answers
Why is there not a simple, "Yes I think so" and "No, I don't think so"? If I want to vote I am required to assume someone else's hypothesis and/or prediction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. you can post that one. I like putting up some scenarios
Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #2
10. It depends on Fitzgerald report you know Bush will need a deversion
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cdb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
3. Naive and hopeful:
Some Democrats will mount an opposition that may or may not prevent it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
4. "War" no. "Preemptive", "defensive", strikes, yes.
It's hard to imagine a military invasion of the kind that was launched against Iraq. With what? But, airstrikes, border clashes, incursions, by us or our surrogates, as "preventive" measures? I'd be damned surprised if they aren't already on the drawing boards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevietheman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
5. This poll is too complicated. n/t
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Booster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
7. I love the term "hillbilly Hitler" - now, that just could stick.
I think Cheney is not going to allow ANYTHING to stop his little oil pipeline across Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq and Syria. He is determined to give what he promised Halliburton when he left them, and all his other oil buddies. I also think if they nuke Iran without provocation, there will be a revolution here, and nothiing good will come from this administration until they are stopped, by whatever means necessary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. fabricated provocation. feel free to use hillbilly hitler...
in conversation, email, and writing without attribution.

Unless you get paid for whatever you use it in.

Then give me half.

Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jhawk_tim Donating Member (73 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. That is a stretch
There is no way there will be an "unprovoked nuke attack". There might well be air strikes, ground strikes, etc, but there is no way we will unleash nukes in a first strike scenario.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Booster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Do a little research and you just might find out differently. Check
out Cheney/Iran or any other way, but Cheney will nuke Iran if he wants to and I think he really wants to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jhawk_tim Donating Member (73 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Even if he wants to
The VP does not have the power to send in the troops let alone push the nuke button. That said, there are those that say Cheney is running the show and W is doing what he says. Even if that is true, there is no way we would launch a preemptive nuke strike. I'm not saying that we won't launch a preemptive "everything we have but nukes" strike, but these guys are smart enough to have gotten here so they are smart enough to know the repercussions nukes would have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. the implication of even Am. Con article: fake terror attack
Cheney could not launch nuke strikes against another country unprovoked, just as they couldn't invade Iraq unprovoked--so a provocation that fits what they want to do will miraculously happen, just like on 9/11.

The simple but chilling truth that is so hard for people to contemplate (which the Bushies know and count on) is that it's not a big step for someone who will kill, torture, and rape people in another country for profit to do the same in their own if it advances their purposes.

If we were talking about a Third World country and a terrorist attack provided a pre-text for a government to sieze another country, we would at least be suspicous.


Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CityZen-X Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
13. It's The End Of The World As We Know It!`
The business alliance that Iran has established with Russia, and China has established a death wish for this inept and vile so called Bu$h*t!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
volitionx Donating Member (86 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-16-05 01:04 AM
Response to Original message
15. WAR, yes, NUKE, no...
The whole Cheney "nuke" statement was designed to escalate tensions and stir up the mud in preparation for a conventional war in Iran.

The neocons will stop at NOTHING to get what they want, which is a Global Corporate Empire.

Have you seen ANYTHING that tells you they respect international law, human rights, sanity? No.

They're going to invade because that's their raison d'etre. That's why the PNAC wrote their report Rebuilding America's Defenses. That's the blueprint: GLOBAL DOMINATION.

And remember the Rapture Right? They need their final battle in the Middle East between Christians/Jews and Muslims, in order for that Jesus guy to return and supposedly sweep them into heaven.

I saw a bumper sticker the other day that said:

"WARNING: In case of rapture this car will be unmanned."

I don't think he was joking, judging by his "W" bumpersticker.

Think the war won't happen? Just wait. Why'd they put Bolton into the U.N. job for one year on a recess appointment--just as a favor? Hell, no. They're going to USE HIM.

Bush just said "all options are on the table" for dealing with Iran. It's going to happen.

And of course we're going to have a draft. Bush said "there'll be no draft", but he's a lying sack of shit, so what do you expect?

He'll just say "well, when I said that, that was in reference to the current situation...now the situation has changed."

If the U.S. actually DID nuke Iran, the radiation would travel all the way around the world as the earth rotated, affecting US. Not that the Bushies care (they are robots who don't breathe air), but there would be RIOTS all over the world, total anarchy, huge boycotts of American goods, and Iran would be radioactive, which would make it harder to occupy. Then comes the martial law, which in combination with the American riots would absolutely destroy the economy. But then they don't have to have elections in 2008. Perfect.

No, Bushfuck will come up with some bullshit reason to start airstrikes, followed by a land invasion with a limited amount of troops, and a draft will soon follow, because the Repugnicans will fall in line and vote for one.

And yes, they might orchestrate another 9/11 (again).

People have got to stop seeing these neocons as just "radicals". They are ABSOLUTELY MENTALLY ILL.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC