Bush Is About To Attack Iran. Why Can't Americans See This?

[RestoreGore]

http://www.ichblog.eu/content/view/132/2/#jc_allComments

Excerpt:

Writing for Global Research (January 24), General Leonid Ivashov, vice president of the Academy on Geopolitical Affairs and former Joint Chief of Staff of the Russian Armies, forecast an American nuclear attack on Iran by the end of April. General Ivashov presented the neoconservative reasoning that is the basis for the attack and concluded that the world’s protests cannot stop the US attack on Iran.

There will be shock and indignation, General Ivashov concludes, but the US will get away with it. He writes:

“Within weeks from now, we will see the informational warfare machine start working. The public opinion is already under pressure. There will be a growing anti-Iranian militaristic hysteria, new information leaks, disinformation, etc. . . . The probability of a US aggression against Iran is extremely high. It does remain unclear, though, whether the US Congress is going to authorize the war. It may take a provocation to eliminate this obstacle (an attack on Israel or the US targets including military bases). The scale of the provocation may be comparable to the 9-11 attack in NY. Then the Congress will certainly say “Yes” to the US President.”

The Bush Regime has made it clear that it is convinced that Bush already has the authority to attack Iran. The Regime argues that the authority is part of Bush’s commander-in-chief powers. Congress has authorized the war in Iraq, and Bush’s recent public statements have shifted the responsibility for the Iraqi insurgency from al-Qaeda to Iran. Iran, Bush has declared, is killing US troops in Iraq. Thus, Iran is covered under the authorization for the war in Iraq.

Both Bush and Cheney have made it clear in public statements that they will ignore any congressional opposition to their war plans. For example, CBS News reported (Jan. 25) that Cheney said that a congressional resolution against escalating the war in Iraq “won’t stop us.” According to the Associated Press and Yahoo News, Bush dismissed congressional disapproval with his statement, “I’m the decision-maker.”

Everything is in place for an attack on Iran. Two aircraft carrier attack forces are deployed to the Persian Gulf, US attack aircraft have been moved to Turkey and other countries on Iran’s borders, Patriot anti-missile defense systems are being moved to the Middle East to protect oil facilities and US bases from retaliation from Iranian missiles, and growing reams of disinformation alleging Iran’s responsibility for the insurgency in Iraq are being fed to the gullible US Media.

General Ivashof and everyone in the Middle East and at the Davos globalization conference in Europe understands the Bush Regime’s agenda.

Why cannot Americans understand?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Iraq was just the appetizer. Iran is the main course. And yet, they will do this and get away with it. Congress always talks a good talk, but it never walks the walk. Even Dennis Kucinich claims going to war in Iran COULD bring about impeachment. COULD? I'm beginning to wonder if they are all really wanting this thinking it will somehow give them a boost for 2008. I am absolutely FED UP with all of this political BS.

BOTTOMLINE: There is no COULD in this, and when this war in Iran gets started in order to please the United States of Israel and the PNAC crowd, it will be too late for "coulds". Demonstrations are all well and good and it gives us a bit of a lift to look at all the nice pictures and see Jane Fonda come back out and all other war demonstrators from years ago that feel the blood flowing in their veins again... however, it isn't going to STOP THEM, and that is what we MUST do. But all we get are "coulds."

This is why I am so angry with the American people as a whole for being so GD ignorant and distracted. This is what WE are reaping as a people because even though we KNOW what these bastards are and have for years now, THEY ARE STILL THERE, and in my mind it defies all logic.

Anyone who believes these evil SOBS are not going to escalate this to get what they want is deluded beyond help. They will have their war as they want, where they want, and they will run it their way, and they are daring us to make the move the Constitution holds us to... but now with so much time passed and so much power being dropped in their laps, even should we do that what would be the response? Martial law?

We already have that in essence with the signing of the Military Commissions Act. What the HELL HAVE WE DONE? I do not have a good feeling about this at all, and if this Democratic Congress can't even get a clean minimum wage bill passed, how the hell are they going to stop this? All I know is, I'm tired of TALK.

[Junkdrawer]

1. The same folks that brought us 9/11 will do it again...only bigger...

The truth about 9/11 is that we don't know what happened on 9/11. And official Washington doesn't want to know.

[frogcycle]

26. You are absolutely right

Their playbook has even been "outed". The six-country strategy got off to a slow start because Iraq was not a cakewalk. Now they need to play catch-up and are feeling the pressure due to the election. So they will accelerate and try to get it all done while they still hold some cards.

What we need is somebody with some big ones to get a bully pulpit and start lecturing - daily if necessary. Someone who will deliver the anti-bush equivalent of the "I have a dream" speech.
Wes Clark coukld do it. He's been right all along; he knows and can explain the details. He is not always a great orator, but he can be. He did a speech in Iowa that sent chills down my spine.


Al Gore could do it. He too has been right all along, has delivered such speeches. He is not quite such an orator, but he has certainly thrown off the "wooden" rap.


If those two gentlemen, neither of whom has announced a candidacy, would join forces and start holding rallies, we just might stir up a movement as strong as King's. The election was great - good start - but the politicians in the new role of majority are still feeling their way. King brought about the Civil Rights Act, by bringing out the mood of the country. Our protest was nice, but it was nothing compared to those in VN, or to Civil Rights marches. The general public does not grab the pitchforks and storm the Bastille without a charismatic leader.

By the way, I think they would get the nomination as a ticket by acclimation if they did that.

And what a ticket that would be!

[shadowknows69]

2. The troops know it

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x63209>

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

3. My husband thinks it won't happen because Bush would be impeached.

I don't think he (Bush), really cares about that. MKJ

[indepat]

6. The same b-words in the Senate who blocked an increase in the minimum wage would not vote to convict

:cry:

[dogfacedboy]

7. It would take more time to impeach than it will take Bush to "pull the trigger".

I believe that Bush is going to get Israel to attack Iran(non-nuclear attack), and Iran will respond with a nuke attack on Israel. Bush will then order a nuclear attack on Iran by the US, calling it "coming to the defense of Israel."

[RestoreGore]

11. Then as a nation, can we not just ARREST THEM?

I really feel such an urgency that unless we take drastic action we will be setting this country on the course to its ruin.

[dogfacedboy]

28. I've been hoping for something like that all along.

I've been hoping all along that if the psychotic Bush, and his master, Cheney, ever came too close to the edge, that a few of the sane Generals would place them under arrest, and hand the matter over to Congress and the Supreme Court to sort out. The legality of this would not immediately matter. What would matter is that a disaster would probably be averted.

[bdamomma]

46. I only wish, they are threatening the security of the American People

this has got to stop.

[bdamomma]

47. after hearing what Conyers said he questioned their (Bush & Cheney)

sanity calling them insane, which they are. And these Senators and Reps know that this regime is completely insane. All the more reason why they have to get them out.

[SammyWinstonJack]

53. ** has already done that.

Set us on the course for our ruin. It was his goal from the start and Mission Accomplished! He is such an a$$hole!

[LonelyLRLiberal]

39. I don't think Iran HAS a nuclear weapon.

Am I missing something? I do agree with the possible scenario, but with conventional weapons used by Iran. Now, Israel does have nuclear weapons. Would Israel start with a nuclear attack on Iran?

[Lerkfish]

40. yes, Israel has already proposed an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities

That would make it a nuclear war, whether conventional weapons are used to do so or not.

Same with the US. Bombing nuclear facilities means creating an instant "dirty bomb", spewing radioacive debris into the atmosphere even IF YOU'RE LUCKY ENOUGH not to cause a full out nuclear reaction.

[LonelyLRLiberal]

41. Very true on results of any attack on a nuclear facility.

How can this possibly even be in the realm of possibility?

I wish we had a mechanism for the people to recall this bunch of creeps! Doesn't look like Congress can, or will, do anything effective.

[bdamomma]

48. with the prompting of US Israel would attack

We sold bombs to Israel during the whole onslaught of Lebanon in the summer. Our country and these maniacs we have in office, have got to go. Now!! This has got to stop.

[acmavm]

4. The world understands what they're up to. Shit, why do you think Russia

just gave the Iranians surface to air missles to shoot down any foreign planes flying over their air space? It wasn't a late Christmas present I assure you.

Have you been reading all the denials coming from bush** about an attack on Iran? When dealing with bush** you know that when he starts denying something, it's a sure bet to happen. And I doubt that other nations are just sitting on their hands waiting because contrary to what this guy thinks, any use of nuclear armaments will cause this country to become isolated, a pariah (more than we already are). I think we'll even lose tony blair at that point. And it will make us fair game in the war on terror because we will have become the biggest terrorist nation on the planet.

[Loge23]

5. He'll do it to save himself

The idiot in chief has displayed an alarmingly casual response to his rapidly declining public image.
Why? Because he's so delusional at this point that he believes his image will be restored by another "terrorist" event.
Coming soon, the attack on criticism.

[RestoreGore]

13. A cornered rat with his finger on the button

Saves no one.

[Lerkfish]

8. and yet, everytime its point out that we will attack Iran, there is a chorus

here at DU that either marginalizes that discussion or tries to conjure up "tin foil hat" characterizations to shut down anyone who suggests it.
Or they flat out say the attack will never happen because its strategically unsound. When its pointed out that nothing about this administration is strategically sound, then they start pulling out the tin foil hat.

one wonders why this chorus has a vested interest in us NOT acknowledging what is patently obvious. They remind me of the groups that say global warming is a lie, in spite of overwhelming evidence it is indeed happening.

[RestoreGore]

12. Hmm, sort of like global warming deniers...

Was a time when believing in global warming was considered tin foil hat as well, even by some in the Democratic community (and of course that still exists with certain groups that back their own interests.) I think people need to take that phrase and stick it in all honesty. These people don't give a damn about anything being 'strategically sound.' They are seeking their Armageddon. They are not rational. They are not concerned with repercussions. They are only concerned with their own agenda and carrying it outr at any cost, and they need to be stopped before they kill thousands more and escalate this world into something unthinkable.

[TheBaldyMan]

14. surely you mean me :)

just use the search facility, my username and Iran as keywords.

'nuff said'
peace out.

[Lerkfish]

15. I"ve never noticed you before you pointed yourself out. I'm speaking in

generalities and I have several people in mind, a collection of about a dozen. I don't remember you, though, so you can feel off the hook.
I don't often remember usernames unless something particular stands out or I have a direct interaction with them.

I don't even know if you're telling me you were part of the chorus or part of the people who surmise an attack is imminent.

[TheBaldyMan]

17. I'm definitely a 'There Will Be No War with Iran' guy

I occasionally chip in on these threads, have done for a couple of years now.

[Lerkfish]

19. ok then, are you also one that accuses other DUers of having a "tin foil hat"

when they disagree with you?

If so, then might feel free to include yourself in my description.
If hower, you simply disagree and just say so, then you aren't part of that chorus.
The "chorus" I refer to is more intent on shutting down people who think there will be an attack.

[TheBaldyMan]

20. No, I vowed to use my powers only for good

A mix of persuasion and inescapable logic.

It does get a bit wearing at times, then I get cranky. I must have contracted RSI because of the number of times I've explaineed why a war with Iran is extremely unlikely if not impossible.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. Erect bogeyman, wave flag, send in the bombers. Works every time.

Trot out the cami-clad generals, the "experts", the talking heads, the charts, and especially the thrilling videos from the "smart" bombs and smiling pilots getting out of their cockpits. Shout "Support Our Troops", talk about the heroic military who "sacrificed" to save us from past bogeymen, and don't forget the flags...lotsa flags.

Voila! A "popular" war.....until it goes sour and the bodies start coming home.

[geomon666]

10. We can't see it over the massive house of John Edwards.

It's freakin hugh!!1

[Skidmore]

16. It will happen and soon. He's already made his little acquiescence to listening to America.

He'll be trotting out shock&awe soon in the form of air strikes and missiles from those ships in the Gulf. And Congress will sit there parsing their asses off trying to excuse their inaction. Republics have shown how dispicable and traitorous they are for quite some times now and I hope they rot in the garbage heaps of history. However, I'm not cutting these Democratic legislators anymore slack. It was an absolute disgrace that so few of them were standing in front of that crowd in DC yesterday.

[Clark2008]

18. Because the talking heads aren't blathering on about it

like they are other, non-important things.

[twilight_sailing]

21. care to put your money up?

"Bush Is About To Attack Iran. Why Can't Americans See This?"

When is "about to"? Put a date on it and put your money up.

[ohio2007]

24. Well, I say its as close to sure thing that

We don't "invade" Iran. So, who's setting up the pay pal ;)
or do I risk "delet" with my twisted humor :)

[Lerkfish]

29. which accomplishes what?

assuming none of us WANT bush to attack Iran, betting FOR it to happen puts anyone in a decidedly uncomfortable situation.

If the person misses the date by 2 days and loses the bet, what do you accomplish, really?

It will be a horrible thing WHEN it happens. It would be a WONDERFUL thing if it doesn't. But living in denial of the pattern of rhetoric and the number of carrier groups heading towards or already in the region only guarantees that nothing will be done to forestall it.

as long as act as if its impossible, or strategically unsound, or won't happen, the ship chug merrily along and put themselves into position. However, if a red flag is raised NOW, there is an opportunity to speak out against it.


again, what exactly, do you accomplish by denying the possibility?

[twilight_sailing]

36. I didn't say that.

"denying the possibility"?

Quote the portion of my post, please, in which I said or even implied such a thing.

[Tom Rinaldo]

22. Agreed. Wes Clark said this last October:

I recorded General Clark making these comments while he was campaigning for Democrats in New Hampshire:


"We're being set up again, just like we were with Iraq, and what I've found in my life is, generally that if you want a war, you can have one.

Most people are about equally brave, most people will fight. Most people love their families, they love their homes, they believe that whatever they believe in is the single one way to truth, reconciliation and the after life, and most people will fight for it. Most people are not philosophical about it, and whether you're walking into a bar in New York City after the Red Sox have played the Yankees, or whether you're dealing with the Bosnians and the Serbs, or whether you're talking about Christians and Iranians.

People will fight for what they believe in. So if we want a war with a billion Muslims, we can probably have one. I don't think we want one, we certainly don't need one, and we should do everything we can to prevent it."


On that same weekend I also recorded Wes Clark making these comments regarding pending war with Iran. I note that he made these comments BEFORE Democrats retook Congress in November, which Clark was then passionately arguing that we had to do everything in our power to make happen. The threat Clark describes suffered a set back with a Democratic victory, but by no means has it been eliminated. Again, this is transcribed from my own recording:


"I think that we're in a very dangerous position because not only is the clock ticking in North Korea, but the clock is ticking in Iran. The President has basically lined up his statements so that he can not live with the possibility of an Iranian nuclear weapon, and he has made a half hearted effort at diplomacy. We're not talking with Iran directly. He's made a half hearted effort at diplomacy, I believe, so that diplomacy will fail. And then, his plan is, sometime in the Spring of 2007, which is not so far away, he's going to come on Television, he's going to say:

'My fellow Americans. For 5 years we've watched the evil empire of Iran struggle to prepare nuclear weapons. Although our intelligence is not perfect, we have enough information to assure us that they're making progress.

As I told, and promised you, we will not allow the worst weapons to fall into the hands of the worst people. Iran is a state that supports Terrorists. For the good of humanity they can not be permitted to have nuclear weapons. We've asked our Allies to help, we've gone to the United Nations, we've asked the Iranians to forbear, nothing has worked. There is no option remaining, but to use America's military superiority to address this growing and gathering threat.

As I speak to you tonight, the first bombers are over Tehran. We will not falter, we will not fail, we will not be denied, and America will prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons.

Thank You my fellow Americans'


More recently, following Bush's State of the Union Address, Wes Clark had this response to a FOX news jock:

Alan Colmes: He had some really strong rhetoric tonight about Iran, about the threat from Iran, about terrorists working with Iran. Do you think he is preparing the country for a possible military action toward that country?

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Yes, I do. I think that the…the…the statements about Iran continue to ratchet up the pressure and uh, lay the groundwork for taking action.

Sean Hannity: General Clark

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK:: And I think it’s very dangerous.

Link for video and transcript of Clark's entire appearance:
http://securingamerica.com/node/2163


I really don't want to be on DU listening to all the shock and outrage expressed by members here after Bush attacks Iran,if very few of those same people were willing to pay much attention to that threat now, before it is to late.

[ohio2007]

23. It was June 2005 invasion of Iran

I remember the "experts" first predicted.
Ground invasion of Iran won't happen.. I bet increased covert ops in Pakistan are more likely then pre emptive boots on the ground of the theocracy rulers.

[Tom Rinaldo]

25. Of course ground invasion won't happen. So?

Does that make you feel more secure? The attack would be from the air, with a limited number of Special Forces troops helping on the ground. That does not fit the definition of an invasion, but it fits the definition of war. And it does not preclude future scenarions in which American ground forces might be used as a consequence of a spiral of violent reactions that spins out of control. It also doesn't preclude bunker busting nukes being used in the first assault from the air.

[ohio2007]

33. So ,there will be no invasion

Like I said, some have been crying wolf for two years now and it is getting old. I think people, behind closed doors, hope an "invasion" of Iran happens.
It won't happen.
Going into parts of Pakistan? Yes. that could happen.

[blues90]

27. It does look more and more possible each week .

Even though many people went out to protest and did this in a peacefull manner I have to rally wonder if this will be taken serious by the house .

I still can't imagine violent protests , the results may very well be marshal law .

As much of a threat his extension of a war on Iran is this subject is far back in the publics mind . Right now many are hanging onto the 2006 elections as a saving trend and the news media runs off with the best 2008 preidential candidate rock star horn honking and this happens even here on the forums along with Edwards damn home .

If this attack on Iran comes to bare then 2008 will be all forgotten and we will be in an entirely new hell .

Impeachment is not quick enough to stop this freaks plans . All we have left is to revolt before we are locked up without the chance but this will never happen , the revolt I refer to .

[dkofos]

30. Here is the real answer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCkYfYa8ePI

[Ishoutandscream2]

31. Too many bread and circuses

American Idol, sports, and pop culture.

[Mick Knox]

32. No one would be suprised

The sheeple are numb.

The rest will be happy.

He will attack Iran or he will get Israel to do his dirty work for him.

I have no doubt that Iran will be attacked.

My heart is heavy with this nightmare.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

34. This thought makes me physically ill. Iran is not a state of mind.

It is a nation filled with people.
Damn this makes me angry that we are gearing up for this attack. Fuck!

The link in a previous post of pictures of Tehran http://www.lucasgray.com/video/peacetrain.html

[The Backlash Cometh]

35. We need to allow the soldiers to speak out about what they've seen

But more importantly, we need to convince the American citizens that our presence is only making things worse.

[gordianot]

37. Iran needs to realize one thing they cannot out bellicose Bush Neo-Cons.

The existence of BFEE is based on the bravado of its enemies. Every time Bush's axis of evil makes a statement it reinforces the BFEE Conservative media empire. Bush actually needs Iran (and to some degree North Korea) to continue their nuclear program.

War with Iran is a war no rational participant really wants. Unfortunately Iran, Israel and the United States Executive branch are not rational and are spiraling into madness of their own rhetoric.

[RegimeChange2008]

38. This insane, genocidal, imperialist, fascist foreign policy must be stopped NOW

Or this nation will forever be lost. Stop Cheney. Stop Bush. Stop Hillary. Outlaw AIPAC. Get back to the business of AMERICA and let the delusional paranoid Nazis of the Likud party defend themselves against their phantom menaces.

[bdamomma]

50. welcome to DU RegimeChange2008

[OneBlueSky]

42. the more important question is . . .

why is Congress not doing anything to stop him? . . . BEFORE he commits us to what could well become World War III? . . .

remember, Bush believes in Armageddon, and it seems he's not averse to helping it along . . . the man's a psychopath, and Congress is sitting back waiting to see what he might do when they should be working 24/7 to stop this insanity before it happens . . .

[bdamomma]

49. I can't remember where I heard or saw it, but someone said

bush's plan is all based on his religious ideations, and not by policy. We have a very dangerous man in office, and Cheney makes my skin crawl, he has already said we in the Middle East to stay, and someone questioned the second fleet that is out there in the Persian Gulf, he commented it is there to watch Iran. Now, how much clearer and these maniacs be, they are provoking an illegal invasion, Cheney I hate that guy, he is so arrogant and someone or somebody has to reign these guys in.

They have no remorse and they are not listening. We have got to stop this.

[Gasping4Truth]

43. The need for an attack grows more urgent every week!

[bklyncowgirl]

44. Most Americans are members of the reality based community.

Anyone looking objectively at a war with Iran knows that it is a bad idea. Even if it was a good idea, our troops are stretched so thin in Iraq that we couln't start a war with a Brownie troop. This is enough for most people to dismiss it out of hand.

What they aren't aware of is the fact that the Bush administration is not living in the same world as they are. They have their vision, they have their plan and they are going to go through with it no matter what. What we see as a disaster in Iraq, they see as a minor setback at worst. What we see as bloodshed and war they see as the necessary steps to that shining moment when the midde east is governed by weak subservient vassal states and the United States controls acess to the oil reserves.

Looking at it from their point of view it seems very likely that they will want to attack Iran. Bush screwed up company after company before he got into politics--why shouldn't he do the same with wars?

[dysfunctional press]

45. it is going to become NECESSARY for the PEOPLE to storm the white house...

and drag mr. & mrs. war-weasel out kicking and screaming. if the crazy-mad little dictator attacks Iran in OUR names, i will expect and accept nothing less than a presidential lynching.

[bdamomma]

51. the shit will definitely hit the fan, we have got to stop this.

they are moving on with the PNAC agenda, it is clear as day, are the Democratic Senators aware of this PNAC agenda?

[dysfunctional press]

52. aware...???

it seems to me that they are in full lockstep with the program.

we're on our own, folks...

[RestoreGore]

54. And we have been on our own for a very long time

And it's time to wake up.

[stevietheman]

56. Indeed. If Bush attacks Iran,

it should be seen as first and foremost a brutal attack on the Constitution, and ALL BETS ARE OFF.

[scarletwoman]

55. Sorry, I saw your post too late to give it a rec, but I totally agree with you.

The bombing of Iran is going to happen quite soon, by April at the latest.

ANYONE who's been paying attention knows this. It drives me nuts to see so many DUers in denial.

sw