How will the Democratic Congress RESPOND to an Iranian "Gulf of Tonkin" incident?

[Faryn Balyncd]

1. . . The Bush/Cheney Administration would appear to be setting the stage for a wider mideast war involving an attack on Iran.


2. . . Chuck Hagel reveals that before the administration adopted the line that they already had congressional approval for an unlimited war against any nation even BEFORE the IWR of 2002, Bush attempted unsucessfully to have the Iraq War Resolution apply to ALL of the Middle East, including Iran.


3. . . Ron Paul predicts a possible "Gulf of Tonkin" incident regarding Iran:

"The truth is that Iran, like Iraq, is a third-world nation without a significant military. Nothing in history hints that she is likely to invade a neighboring country, let alone America or Israel. I am concerned, however, that a contrived Gulf of Tonkin- type incident may occur to gain popular support for an attack on Iran."

"Escalation in the Middle East", January 15, 2007

4. . . Wesley Clark tells Fox News that the White House is dangerously "laying the groundwork" for war with Iran.


5. . . Antiballistic Patriot missiles are moving into place, despite lacking tactical or strategic value in fighting Iraqi insurgents.


6. . . A second Naval strike force is on the way.


7. . . The president asserts he needs no congressional authorization to attack Iran, defending this position variously by either stating that:

- - - - A. Bush has unlimited authority under radical "unitary executive" constitutional theory as interpreted by John Yoo, OR, alternatively, that

- - - - B. unlimited authority was granted by Congress in a 2002 resolution which predated the Iraq War Resolution (essentially taking the position that the Iraq War Resolution was a convenient & symbolic act of cheerleading, rather than a constitutional process), OR,

- - - - C. Both of the above. (Take your pick, Alberto!)


8. . . And President Bush demonstrates nothing to indicate he will change his addiction to reponding to political set-backs by upping the ante, and doubling his bets.



. . . . . . .



So the question remains:



How will the Democratic "leadership" (and the newly enlightened Republican defectors) respond to an Iranian "Gulf of Tonkin" incident?

[iconoclastic cat]

1. Does anyone have an idea of how much longer before the stage is set? nt

[troubleinwinter]

2. I fear we know the answer.

[martymar64]

3. They'll fall for it.

The msm will whip up enough war frenzy that they'll fall right in line like they did after 911.

I hope I'm wrong but I don't think I am.

[HuffleClaw]

4. how can they 'respond' to events that will have already happened?

i doubt there will be any time for them to do so, this is simply gonna happen because bush knows he can't give them any time to stop him legislatively.

[Lord Byron]

5. Hillary and the mainstream Democrats will fall in line

[emald]

6. they will all vote for war because the profits are good for the country

don't you know. clinton, the senator not the sex addict, voted for this mess and seems unconcerned about ending it. she might have stocks in defense, almost certainly does. Profit allows for much sin to be overlooked. War with Iran is inevitable because there is just too much profit in it. Greed is destroying the us.

[snappyturtle]

7. Amen. n/t