"We will bomb Iran"........by Ed Garvey, "Fightingbob.com"

[a kennedy]

In the April 17,2006 issue of The New Yorker, award-winning journalist Seymour Hersh shocked many of us with his expose of the neocon plans to bomb Iran with bunker-buster nukes. The premise is on "the belief that a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government." The official who confided in Hersh asked,"what are they smoking?" (Remember LBJ telling us that bombing Hanoi would bring them to the bargaining table? Now deceased Mass. Senator Saltenstall responded, "When they bombed Pearl Harbor our first instinct was not to negotiate. We were all mad as hell.")

Get this. "The President has quietly initiated a series of talks on plans for Iran with a few key key members of Congress, including at least one Democrat. (Lemme ask. Could it possibly be neocon Joe Lieberman?)

Hersh described the planning in April of 2006, as "hectic." And here is my Whoa Nelly moment.

Hersh quotes an official: "There's no pressure from Congress not to take military action. The only political pressure is from the guys who want to do it." ("It" is the bombing of Iran.)

Why am I convinced the United States will attack Iran? Read Norman Podhoretz in the June issue of Commentary where he describes WW IV. Norman Podhoretz would, in normal times, be described as the lunatic fringe of the neocon movement but these are not normal times. In essence, after comparing Ahmadinejad with Hitler, and accusing those of us who think diplomacy not nukes should provide a better answer as impotent and appeasers, he warns of the destruction of Israel unless we nuke 'em. Yikes!

http://www.fightingbob.com/weblog.cfm

[Philosoraptor]

1. If it were to protect Israel, Americans would probably go for it.

That seems to be the logic anyway, if you can call it logic.

[Ezlivin]

4. Why isn't Israel our 51st state?

We seem to give them more care and aid that we do to our own territories.

AIPAC is a tremendously powerful lobby and has many politicians scared to death of it.

[Dhalgren]

2. It has gotten to the point where nothing makes sense and nothing doesn't make sense,

if that makes sense. Who on Earth are we? Why are we doing these horrible things? These are silly questions, but good questions, nonetheless. I am afraid that we are past the point of fixing this country through "normal" politics. If the US attacks Iran, how will we ever climb out of the hole that will create?

[JHB]

3. I'm inclined to think that the surest way to guarantee Israel's destruction...

...is to embark on exactly the course Podhoretz, the other neocons, and the whole "bomb Iran" crowd is advocating.

[Norquist Nemesis]

5. Won't be surprised at all if Bush does it

Between adding naval ships with armaments pointed at Iran, putting an Admiral at the helm of CentCom to replace Abizaid, and most recently the appointment of Admiral Mullen as JCSC it's hard not to imagine Bush ordering a campaign originating from the Navy.

In the run-up to Iraq, as soon as it was announced that the military was being deployed it was obvious that all was a go. There just wasn't anyway that it was going to turn out any other way. Bush deploying hundreds of thousands of military personnel and equipment...he wasn't going to tell them to turn around and come home after sending them off.

It's looking very much the same for an Iran Campaign.