2007-12-03 06:52:07 · 21 answers · asked by antichrist brother555666 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Bush does not have adequate resources at his disposal. Congress will not rubberstamp the war like they did against Iraq. No resources means no war. Even Bush understands that the priority is to make Iraq stable before he leaves.
2007-12-04 03:56:49 · answer #1 · answered by Vic 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My guess is that depends on who is likely to follow him. Right now the 'leading' candidates will all follow his agenda and most likely continue to spread this war throughout the Middle East. This includes the leading Dems as well. In that case, he doesn't need to bomb them right away.
But if the voters are able to nominate a candidate, such as Ron Paul, who will certainly NOT extend Bush's war, Bush might push for a pre-emptive attack in order to commit the U.S. to follow his agenda even past his term.
2007-12-03 14:59:44 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
It doesn't seem so with the latest breaking news. I think that Iran should never get the bomb, even if USA, Israel or a coalition of countries has to bomb it. I hope that it never comes to that.
2007-12-03 14:57:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
N O, PRESIDENT Bush WILL NOT bomb Iran before his term is up!!
2007-12-03 14:57:03 · answer #4 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Only if he wants to see the Gulf oil refineries destroyed, the US attacked domestically, and the global economy thrown into massive chaos.
But, given his ability to screw up something as large as planet earth or as small as a paper clip, he may just be mentally unbalanced enough to try something like this.
I rather doubt he has the power to order this anyway, so the question is moot.
congress would never approve such a move and I doubt the military would obey any command from him or his cabinet personally to do this. If he tried that, I think he would be arrested.
2007-12-03 14:57:56 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Probably not --Unless Hillary wins- And that will be just to pay the Democrats back. Just kidding.
I don't see any way it's logical to bomb Iran and not create more trouble than it's worth.
2007-12-03 14:57:56 · answer #6 · answered by namsaev 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Only if he and, perhaps more importantly, Cheney have the cahones to knock over the chess board and openly subvert the democratic process. Who knows at this point.
2007-12-03 15:09:31 · answer #7 · answered by haywood jablome 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There's nothing he can do these days that will shock me anymore than he already has.
But do I think he will go after Iran?
I'd say the chances are pretty high he will....for whatever reason he decides to dream up.
2007-12-03 14:57:32 · answer #8 · answered by Tyrone Shoelaces 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No chance. Intelligence reports say Iran abandoned their nuclear program in 2003. George is not stupid enough to make the same mistake twice.
2007-12-03 14:56:09 · answer #9 · answered by $Sun King$ 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
If he does the Iranians will welcome us as liberators. The oil will pay for the war and we can do it easily with the number of troops we have right now. AND it will only cost a couple of billion dollars. Right?
2007-12-03 15:01:02 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋