The intent is to NUKE IRAN!!!

[RethugAssKicker]

Bush doesn't have the military for a ground war, but they are speaking louder and louder on Iran. Why? - to get us prepared for what they "must do"... to go to war with Iran.... They plan on using "tactical nuclear" weapons, and are currently brain-washing us to accept its use!

[Walt Starr]

1. It's all sabre rattling with wooden sabers

They will NEVER nuke IRAN.

NEVER!

It's all bluster to try and get them to back down. They pulled the same shit with North Korea and it didn't work then, either. They fucked up and got us into a quagmire, so the whole world knows all they're doing si spouting shit.

They know damned well and good, any attack on Iran will result in real consequences for all of our military forces currently in the ME theater. Aircraft Carriers will be hit. There's a real Iranian Air Force. There is the potential for over a millon screaming Iranians to pour over the Iraqi border, not to mention a Shia uprising in Iraq!

It'll never happen.

[ixion]

11. never say never when speaking about the depths to which

the * cabal will sink to accomplish their plan of destroying our once great Republic.

Just my two cents. ;-)

[madokie]

24. I'm with you

it will be a nuclear war, with china, russia and no telling who else becoming involved.

[Kierkegaard]

12. Just because it's not a logical thing to do...

doesn't mean these idiots won't do it. Never overestimate the reasoning ability of our demented misadministration.

[Strelnikov_]

13. Agree (I Hope). They Are Doing The Kabuki Dance Expected Of Them n/t

[benburch]

14. I wish I had your faith in their rationality. nt

[RethugAssKicker]

15. Thats exactly what they want!

WORLD WAR III.

They adore war, love it... find it honorable!

[in_cog_ni_to]

18. Walt? Is that you?

Of course they will nuke Iran! That's what they have wanted to do for YEARS. We don't have the troop power to attack them. Nukes are the only way and why do you think they give a rats ass about our troops? They did send them over to Iraq without the proper armour. Bush and Cheney are just chomping at the bit to use their nuclear weapons. Iran is their PERFECT excuse.

[sheelz]

19. * doesn't care about our military!

[ET Awful]

20. If they did, they would anger Pakistan, who already has nukes.

Pakistan, not having the range to directly attack the US with nuclear weapons may very likely use the opportunity to attack India considering the newfound "alliance" Shrubco has formed there (considering their recent nuclear deals with Bush, Pakistan attacking India is not at all unlikely).

Where it would go from there is anybody's guess.

[killbotfactory]

30. I thought they were just saber rattling with Iraq

then it was too late.

[atomic-fly]

2. just great

I know that psychopath wants to use one.

[Democrats_win]

3. Think of the irony: to prevent nukes, use them. This is FUBAR, big time.

[amber dog democrat]

4. I don't see that happening.

Not that I would not put it past the Chimp to want to do this, but an un provoked attack of this kind would be the undoing of any decent standing the US hopes to ever have in the world community.
Someone would over rule this. Other than the " left behind " fundies, I can't see very many who would seriously entertain such an idea. You want a REAL war on terror ?

Yet, I could be wrong.

[cali]

5. That would be the end of history.

It would also cause a civil war in this country. I know they're stupid and dangerous, but I have a hard time believing they think they could get away with a nuke attack on Iran. They'd need somehting like a 9/11 with a dirty bomb directly traceable to Iran.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

23. Paging Francis Fukuyama! LOL I got your "end of history" right here!

[Turbineguy]

6. Bush is going to war with Iran

Why? Because he wants to and he's the President.

So, do we move troops from Iraq and suffer an additional 10,000 dead or do we nuke?

[Just Me]

7. Gotta' try out those new "bunker busters" to justify awarding more,...

,...taxpayer-funded contracts to the military-industrial complex. There's lotsa money to made. Gotta' expand that war into a world conflict and keep the defense contractors stoves full. ;(

[katty]

10. they are itching to try their mini-nukes-uncle has a hardon for war

[WinkyDink]

32. Exactly. Gotta "penetrate" and "bust" those bunkers with those

"robust" weapons.
Soooooooo psychologically transparent.

[BattyDem]

8. There is absolutely NO justification for it.

Even if they "prove" that Iran has nukes, that's no reason to nuke them first ... and the entire world knows it. Sure, an attack on America would probably change things, but unless it's a nuclear attack - which I don't even want to think about - how can BushCo justify using nukes?

If we nuke Iran, we're toast. It'll be WWIII and we'll be playing the role of "Germany". BushCo is overplaying their hand. The rest of the world doesn't need us anymore. We're not the invincible superpower that we once were. If we use nukes, it's "game over" and we lose. :scared:

[FloridaPat]

9. After connecting the dots, I believe the plan is as follows:

Israel bombs all those nuclear plant sites. US planes will go with them to protect them. That way we aren't the ones that are attacking Iran. Also Tehran. This will kill all those nutty Muslims and the sane Muslims (or bought Muslims) will take over and sell all that oil to the US.

However, if the nutty ones stay in power and attack our troops in Iran or attack Israel in defense, * promises to use nuclear bombs.

However, Russia recently sold Iran an air defense system. China and Russia have lots of contracts with Iran for oil. So does the rest of the world. Attacking Iran any way they can will result in 1-extremely high oil prices and/or 2-an attack on the US by Russia and/or China and/or Iranian paramilitary people. This is a no-win disaster for everyone except the loonies in the White House.

Another possibility is - everyone dumps the dollar. China has $250-350 billion. Cheap war for them. Our money becomes useless. We cannot import anything. No oil coming in. No clothes, cars, tv's, etc. The US economy collapses. I think in any scenario the US economy collapses. But * can blame the collapse on everyone but him and the rest of repubs.

No need for authroization from congress. No need for money. Just move the troops to Iran.

[wakeme2008]

16. IF Bush used a nuc, NO Country would back him

Not even Poodle Dog Blair. The problem is I do not think he cares.

[librechik]

25. what if he denied it and no one could prove it?

these new "Tactical field" weapons they have are not much more dangerous than a daisy cutter, supposedly. And there's so much DU in the atmosphere near US operations that a little more won't hurt, right?

these guys are so incompetent, the worst couls happen too easily, and no one would ever be able to hold them to account. Just like now.

[wakeme2008]

26. The Russian's have the same type Sats we have

and can det nuc. explosions.

[lpbk2713]

17. I doubt if Cheney would consider a NUCULAR assault.

(And I said Cheney because he's the real decision maker)

If they lobbed a few nukes over ther then they wouldn't be able to get near the Iranian oil fields, the richest in the whole world. Cheney and his pals are salivating at the very thought of all those petro-dollars.

[timbnyc44]

21. Clinton's tough talk has the WH playing catch-up in war-mongering

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/19/international/middleeast/19cnd-iran.html?ex=1141880400&en=c8bf5e9c13094235&ei=5070


Hillary Clinton Says White House Has Mishandled Iran


By JOHN O'NEIL
Published: January 19, 2006
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton last night criticized the Bush administration for its response to Iran's nuclear program, saying it had chosen to "downplay" the crisis over the past several years.

In a speech at Princeton University, Mrs. Clinton, a New York Democrat, joined the Bush administration's call for sanctions against Iran, and also said that the threat of military action against nuclear sites should not be ruled out.

[newyawker99]

28. Hi timbnyc44!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Strelnikov_]

22. Without A 1 Million Man Expansion Of US Ground Forces (Draft)

ANY attack on Iran, including 'limited' air strikes, would be incompetence rising to the level of treason.

Why? Well, look what is going on now. Almost all of our ground forces are tied down policing 7 M +/- Sunnis in Iraq. What happens if, following 'limited' air strikes, we now find ourselves policing the 15 M Shia in Iraq concurrent with a general uprising in the gulf region?

How much sense does it make to gamble with 25%+ of the worlds current oil production, and 70% of it's reserves, not to mention a nearly equal proportion of natural gas? Without deployment of an adequate (500k +) force, economic collapse of the western economies will be a real possibility within six months of the first bomb falling.

[Stephanie]

27. I think you're right

They have long talked of using "tactical" nukes. And they have no army left to fight with.

[earth mom]

29. I also think you are right....but...

they may try and cover it up somehow. After all, the media is in Bush Cos back pocket and with the way they are controlling all the info, it's doubtful that we're gonna hear the real truth. :scared:

[Deja Q]

31. Which means we needn't worry about not raising the debt cap.