Is the Chimp really going to attack Iran ?

[steve2470]

Poll question: Is the Chimp really going to attack Iran ?

What do you think ?

[Iwasthere]

1. Does a bear shit in the woods?

He needs a MAJOR distraction. This would fit the bill. Even if it would start a global catastrophe. WAR IS PEACE.

[bryant69]

7. That seems excessively cynical

A few points

1. Bush and his conservative base seem to genuinely want to invade Iran and impose Democracy. They think it is the next step to a stable and Democratic and oil giving Middle East. They are wrong, but that's pretty clearly what they believe. So they'd be keen on invading Iran even without the current political scandal season.

2. Conversely a war with Iran is going to be massively expensive and unpopular. If he was just looking for a distraction there are a lot better things he could come up with compared to this.

In reality I think the current scandals and investigations and showdowns probably make an invasion of Iran less likely.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Iwasthere]

11. Their goal all along is persistant war

At all costs. The meetings Rumsfeld and the other madmen had in the 90s showed this. feed that war machine. Just sayin, Iraq isn't going so well. I can see their feeble little minds seeing Iran as an important tool.

[Greyhound]

15. I think you've got it backward, they want an unstable, volatile oil supply,

it's much more profitable. They can't easily manipulate the prices/profits in a stable market, just look at what the Saudis did to them in the 80's, they are reprehensible bastards, but they're not stupid.

They don't give two shits about popularity, it's all about the looting.

[LSK]

19. why? what is he running for?

[liberalnurse]

2. He will give a full assault

after Britain sends of the first charge.

[baldguy]

3. How are his poll numbers doing?

[bdamomma]

4. I didn't vote but I hope this does not happen

plus they are playing their biggest FEAR card on all of us.

[katsy]

5. I don't think he'll cross the line -

unless he wants to cross Russia and China. Britain would be our only ally IMO.

[CJCRANE]

6. Yes.

The PNAC guys telegraph their intentions years in advance and they don't back down. (Although they are behind schedule).

My hunch is that the PTB want an oil pipeline running through Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan. Iran completes the set.

[steve2470]

8. what is PTB ? nt on edit: powers that be ? nt

[CJCRANE]

12. Yep.

You know, whoever it is that gives Blair/Bush-Cheney/BFEE their marching orders.

[Alcibiades]

9. He already has a war

They can keep Iraq going forever. There's no need to start a war with Iran. The goal is permanent war in Iraq.

They might try a "surgical strike," but even this is unlikely. As for a ground war, Bush is that stupid, but Rove is not. If they do this, they go down in history as worse than Hoover: Republicans will be shut out of electoral politics for a generation.

[asjr]

10. Considering the Chimp has never made a

worthwhile decision in his worthless life, he will probably do it.

[Dr Fate]

13. yes- and the media and many conservative DEMS will be "fooled" into going along.

And in a couple of years when it goes sour, the DLC and the media will pretend that they were never in support of it- and that they are the best people to fix it.

[onenote]

14. question: how many of those voting yes also predicted we'd attack iran

before the elections as an "october surprise" or any of the half dozen other times iran attacks have been "definitively" predicted here on DU?

And if there is no attack in the next 30 days and this poll is published, will you vote that the attack will come in the next 30 days after that (and so on?)

My point: crying wolf doesn't serve anyone's interest. Not saying the situation might change, but the chances of an attack on Iran by the US without prior debate (and some triggering event) are next to zero, imo.

[CJCRANE]

17. Blair is desperately trying to provide

the trigger event or at least the precursor to it.

For reference see the Downing Street Memo about Bush/Blair machinations prior to the Iraq invasion.

[Phoonzang]

24. Yes it seems like..

we've been "about to attack" Iran for almost a year now.

[Iwasthere]

30. Just answering the question

And if you add the 30 days and 60 days together what is the pulse of those in here. We are just sayin what our gut tells us. The madman is backed into a corner like he has never been before.

[Webster Green]

16. The corporate/fascist media is pushing for it..

I think the war/chimp is about to wag the dog.

[CJCRANE]

20. I just saw an interview with the female British detainee

on the BBC (coincidentally interviewed the day before the incident).

The fact that HMS Cornwall suddenly appeared near the disputed waters and the detainees interviewed before their capture set the alarm bells ringing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6500583.stm

(Reminds me of the Kuwaiti ambassador's daughter "Iraqis throwing babies out of incubators" story before the '91 invasion. I.e. the human interest story that brings it home).

On edit: I'm not saying the sailors are in on it but I believe they've been set up in some way.

[LSK]

18. not sure, leaning towards no, this is really Cheneys idea

And from what I understand they are starting to ignore Cheney.

[Bobbieo]

21. Who is going to stop Bush/Cheney if they want a war with Iran?????

WHO?????

[LSK]

23. Im not convinced Bush thinks its a good idea

And I read a while back that Rove thinks its a bad idea.

[CJCRANE]

25. They seemed to think

invading Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon was OK.

Might as well complete the set.

[LSK]

28. there are specific reasons for each

Everyone pretty much agreed that OBL was in Afghanistan and the Taliban protected him. So that war was a given.

Iraq was the brainchild of Wolfowitz and the Neocons who had a bug up its ass about Saddam since Gulf War 1 and everyone was convinced it would be a 3 month war and we'd be greeted as liberators and all that BS.

Lebanon wasnt actually an invasion by us and that can be considered an ongoing conflict.

Now Im sure there are some in the White House who want to attack Iran but I think there are a few others who have seen the failure of the Iraq war, know we have no troops for it and are against it.

[CJCRANE]

31. The Lebanon invasion was sanctioned

by the neocons. Condi gave her classic "chance to reshape the Middle East" speech, i.e. let's smash everything up then put it back together how we want it.

These countries are all on the PNAC wishlist that Wesley Clark mentioned, and Iran is next in line.

Plus the Psyops are already working - the gullible 33% of Britons and Americans are ready to nuke Iran:

http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=2&threadID=5882&edition=1&ttl=20070327204833&#paginator

[LSK]

32. but we didnt need to do anything for the Lebanon war except look the other way

And ship a few weapons.

And nothing in the Lebanon situation actually changed.

[Bobbieo]

26. Of course, it is a bad idea. It is a lousy idea!!!

[EFerrari]

22. Barbara Lee was very definite at her town hall that this issue

needs IMMEDIATE attention. :(

[Done]

27. Bush is too rational for such a crazy move.

:sarcasm:

[Jamastiene]

29. My official prediction:

Somehow, America is going to "come to the defense of" ally, Great Britain, thereby letting Chumpy off the hook for "starting" a war in Iran. That's probably how they are orchestrating this whole thing to make it happen without looking like bigger asses than they already do.

[A Simple Game]

33. Nobody is that stupid, are they? n/t

[LiberalFighter]

34. Rename Crawford to Iran