Will Bush attack Iran in April 08 anyway?

Question

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=33454§ionid=3510302

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_-FJ-1ZQTM

Answer 1

By your use of the word “anyway” I can only assume that you mean despite the latest NIE.
My personal opinion is that all for all of the reasons that Scott Ritter cites, and more besides, there is every indication that a war is eminent. In point of fact, it began some time ago. It is in its more prominent form, that of outright military attack or invasion, that we have not yet seen, but make no mistake, this war has already begun. Keep in mind that the primary enemy in any war is the domestic population of the warring country, the control of public opinion -- what you and I think -- that is the key target of these efforts. It is noteworthy to quote Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propagandist: "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." [sounds like Bush, doesn’t it?]"The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
Concerning Iran, I have some doubts as to whether it will occur in the Spring, as Ritter suggests, unless that is limited to the air war. As far as ground troops are concerned, I think we will see that occur later in the year, when summer’s heat passes, and the upcoming election provides a perfect opportunity to use another manufactured threat to see to it that the election get ‘postponed’. Perhaps that won’t be necessary. After all, Hitler did it by calling for an election, rather than avoiding one. Confronted as they were with a ‘threat’ the German people demanded that their Republic be dismantled, and a strong leader be put into power to right the wrongs, to get tough. Under such a scenario, the vote hardly matters, and if the election suggests a crumbling of the façade, the voting machines can be hacked in a silent coup. As Stalin pointed out, “He who casts the votes decides nothing. He who counts the votes decides everything.” And as George Galloway rightly points out, Uncle Sam has no interest in democracy, here or elsewhere. The elites in our country have more in common with the elites in other countries than they do with their populations. Not being taught in school world history, very few understand that there is a very long history of the abuse of the power of the state, accomplished with relative ease. It doesn’t take some vast conspiracy. Only a few key members in a few key positions, can bring down our Republic, just as was done in the Weimar Republic. The war of the few against the many is an on-going war, a class war, designed to rob us of anything and everything of value we posses. Whether it is done at gunpoint or in the courts, by the police or by the legislatures, its goal is and always will be the installation of a tyranny of a select group over all others. Conditioned as most of us are to fear that which we are told to fear, such pronouncements can be dismissed out-of-hand as the mere rantings of an un-patriotic paranoid. To quote another Nazi, Hermann Goering, "Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship ...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger."

Finally, lest we think ourselves so exceptional that we have no need to fear the disintegration of our Republic, I leave you with the following quote:
"What happened was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to be governed by surprise, to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security ...
To live in the process is absolutely not to notice it -- please try to believe me -- unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us ever had occasion to develop. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, regretted.
Believe me this is true. Each act, each occasion is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join you in resisting somehow.
Suddenly it all comes down, all at once. You see what you are, what you have done, or, more accurately, what you haven't done (for that was all that was required of most of us: that we did nothing) ... You remember everything now, and your heart breaks. Too late. You are compromised beyond repair. "
German professor after World War II describing the rise of Nazism to a journalist
Get Involved. Organize.
Respect.

Answer 2

Wow, that's the most delusional couple I have seen: Rutter and Bush make Beavis and Butthead look like geniuses! The idea that God told Bush to attack Iran is a good example of why Bush needs to step down (overthrown, rather) and get intense psychological counseling.

Answer 3

no attack sorry, Bush got the news out before the right wing media leaked it, it really hurt his chances of war, now really the only thing left is a big terrorist attack during the election process, that will give everything steam and push a republican in the white house

Answer 4

It would not surprise me a bit.

If he decides to invade Bush will stay in power for awhile longer.
He can state that in a time of war there will be no elections.

Answer 5

No, it's logistically impossible. We have too many of our resources and troops tied up in Iraq and Afganistan. It would put too much of a strain on the military.

Answer 6

no i dout all people willprevent him he agreed that nagady took part in gulf top last month many organization declared that iran nuclear project is only for peacful purposes so thir is no cause to attack iran and increase hatness for usa

Answer 7

How? With what? Where is he going to find troops? Would he actually just bomb the crap out of em and leave it alone? Wouldnt that be like throwing rocks at a hornets nest?............Yea I guess he might. Pretty scary.

Answer 8

this is a few large secret operation there. chuffed to comprehend that if this is genuine, Bush's administration is so honest that they won't leak the guidelines to the enemy, huh?

Answer 9

I really don't think so. This time Congress will have enough courage and information to stop our lunatic.

Answer 10

Probably hes has nothing else to do but ruin his country