Is Bush crazy enough to try to attack or invade Iran anytime soon?

Question

It would be a nightmare scenario for the U.S. to attack Iran. They would crush Iranian forces in a matter of hours, but the economic ramifications would be horrible. The price of gas would sky rocket and this would cripple the economy.

But there have been hints that this could happen.

Do you think it might happen?

Answer 1

There have been "hints" see below.

See Barry - a couple of years ago this video was considered pretty fringe - now - it seems positively well reasoned -
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1669325314815164245&q=what+barry+says&hl=en

Well, it would have at least appear to be an "accident" or another festive "executive action" at this point.

As it happens (not suprisingly) Israel also wants desparately to attack Iranian nuclear facilities but doesn't have bombers with the range to do so.

Unfortunately you have a bunch of recycled armchair warriors from the 1970's who are mentally still there, and are still quite pissed about things like Viet Nam and the "Iranian Hostage Crisis" from almost 30 years ago.

The folks who brought us the Iraq war, the "Neoconservative" movement over at the American Enterprise Institute have recently changed their PR spin and are openly and DEARLY hoping to attack Iran and support our "allies".

Whereas most people directly responsible for the underpinnings of a war that is "not going to plan", might feel a bit chasened and be hesitant to ask to be heard - yet again.

Not so the neo-cons,

More hints include these helpful guidelines

1st. Re-inventing your agenda - convince yourself "You weren't wrong". the newest spin at the AEI is that the Iraq war was simply badly executed from a military perspective, implicitly stating that somehow wedged between Donald Rumseld and Richard Cheney were nameless administration officials that made the US military unable to to properly do the jobs needed to win uncontestedly in Iraq. Seeing as they were the only one's at the helm, and both serve on the board at the AEI this seems a little far fetched.

2nd - "Don't let reality stop you" - Never let it be said that their isn't boundless optimism at the AEI, - sort of, just not in a good way.

The NEW way to pose Iran as something other than a theoretical threat to her neighbors, is to just militarily attack their installations in other countries, etc. Note the tit for tat embassy problems.

a. Last week, the US decided to use military force to raid and detain embassy employees and diplomats in Kurdish Iraq accuse the occupants of the embassy of "working for Iranian interests and intelligence agencys". - To my mind this is like raiding a Mc Donalds on suspicion somone is going to eat hamburger.

b. This week there was a "completely unrelated" mortar attack against a US embassy in Athens, radical communists - who weren't even caught or anything.

C'mmon...Radical communists???...Greece still has one?

Expect more fun here.

4th. Start coming up with more scenarios which seem plausible at first glance but will fall apart without adequate "intelligence". Be prepared to have your friends back at the AEI supply the "intelligence" barring that "ominous sounding rhetoric" will do.

5th. Make sure you do what you can to isolate the moderate elements of Iranian society because it just wouldn't look good if we couldn't demonize our potential future enemy ahead of time.

6th. Do whatever it takes to not actually talk to the Iranians - ever.

To be fair - Iran has endeavored to create 3000+ centrifuges which have only one purpose - turning not-so-enriched uranium - into very enriched uranium.

However, one thing should be noted, the idea of a Iranian nuclear weapon has one small drawback for the Iranians. They have a return address.

As with North Korea or any other upstart nuclear state, If ever a weapon was actually USED there wouldn't be an very much longer after that.

Forget for a moment that Israel has approximately 200 to 250 missile launchable nuclear weapons. Forget for a moment that Saudi Arabia is quietly building their own nuclear weapon systems, or that Pakistan and India already have nuclear weapons as well.

These items must all be forgotten if you wish to remain hysterical about this issue.

But you say - OMG - what about Al Quaeda - they don't have a return address!!!

Well there you have something. If our boy Osama obtained and then used a nuclear weapon or the US suffered some sort of "Jehrico" type event - what would we do.

It's like this, if Osama or any other islamic terrorist organization used a nuclear weapon or for some reason thereafter the President wasn't ordering our SSBN's to cease fire, rest assured there are standing instructions to make life significantly brighter (for about 10-50 seconds) for nearly 200 million people in various countries of the Middle East.

The concept goes right back to the 1950's - it's called mutually assured destruction, like with the cold war it's not so much about how much your opponent hates you - its about how much they love their children.

Answer 2

The Democratic majority voted to grant him powers to invade Iran led by our expensive Ms Hillary. She's desperate to proceed the Bush conflict for worldwide domination. What a gal. every physique with a million/2 a strategies that slightly purposes does not invade Iran simply by fact; a million. there is no reason to until you're a appropriate wing-nut Israeli 2. Iran isn't Iraq. a million/2 of that's mountainous. there is not the sectarian divisions to make the main as we've in Iraq. Irn hasn't sufferred below blockade as Iraq had earlier we invaded. 3. The enormous debt that we've incurred from payng the Iraqi military, a mercenary military, the Iraqi police and government etc would sink our financial equipment already. yet another conflict in Iran could actual do the interest. 4. the international does not purely look at us as warped, yet as a danger to worldwide stability. In different words we would be the dwanger to the international - not the place we would desire to be. 5. the visual attraction of the Bush marketing campaign against Islam would have far achieving effects that would desire to convey conflict to the united states of america for some years to come back. learn a sprint historic previous and notice what got here approximately to ALL international locations that depended on conflict for his or her ability interior the international. Wait-a-minute ...i'm speaking logical experience here and we've a born-returned crusader with a million/2 a strategies that slightly purposes who thinks he can do what historic previous never has allowed. uh-ohhhhh....

Answer 3

Oh, I see the price YOU pay for gasoline is more important than the lives of all the people who would be killed by Iran's atomic bomb.
What do you think is going to happen to the economy when Iran pops one in Israel and then Israel makes Tehran glow? Or what about when some terrorist loads a bomb inside a cargo container and sets it off at the port of Baltimore, New York, or Miami?
Unless you have some terminal disease, YOU will see war in Iran SOON whether it is the USA or Israel.

Answer 4

A few weeks ago I would have said no, but he certainly seems to be trying to provoke Iran into giving him an excuse. If we do invade Iran, I wonder if the hard right in this country will get acid reflux from regurgitating that tired old "liberals=terrorist sympathizers" line.

I might have to wear a "Proud to be labeled un-American by bastards" t-shirt if it comes to that.

Answer 5

The hints have mostly come from far left & Q&A.
No one in charge including the President has mentioned invading anyone. The President said Iranians could not enter Iraq or supply the terrorist in Iraq anymore. That is a loooong way from invading.

Answer 6

What are you talking about? Russia is there? Putin the leader of the Russian government has them there. What do we want a war with Russia? But if the UN decides that we need to go in we will.

Answer 7

i dont understand how bush is ignoring the american people when they want no more war.. but who in their right mind would want war... and just democrazy is a weak excuse for invading ...also troops are spreaded really thin right? where is he going to get the extra people for more of his invasions? im american but im living overseas and more and more people are pissed with the me me me of the americans..the world is gettting smaller, people need to learn how to negotiate rather than blowing someone up. peace

Answer 8

I have proposed several times that the US surrounds the oil fields of these "terrorist sponsoring nations" and suck them dry. Solve our problems with fuel prices for a while and solve our problem with terrorists permanently; at least from the countries with no more oil.

SUCK OUT THE OIL IN 2007

Answer 9

I would not put anything beyond him at this point. He may be talking to oil paintings in the White House for all I know.
There is no good reasin for attacking Iran.

Answer 10

I wonder if he's crazy enough to expand everything right before he exits the office and leaves a hopeless mess