Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Will someone explain to me why the possibility of Iran

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Bush was AWOL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 09:02 PM
Original message
Will someone explain to me why the possibility of Iran
being involved in 9/11 is a good thing for Bush.

I think these latest developments on Iran make him look like an even bigger idiot for going into Iraq.

Lots of people thought the reason we went to Iraq was because of 9/11. But now that it appears that Iran and not Iraq had something to do with 9/11 makes Bush look even more foolish and incompetent, imo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 09:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. Will someone explain to me why the possibility of Iran
It's called "spin".

On a totally unrelated note... that just popped into my head... why is Evian, naive spelled backwards? I think the 2$ a bottle could have something to do with it. Just a thought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dudeness Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 09:07 PM
Response to Original message
2. good point ...
however the plan of attacks were announced some time ago.."axis of evil"...I am not so sure that bushs corporate backers even care if he looks stupid,incompetent or loses the next election..you will have committed full scale troop deployments to the middle east and a democratic president will continue that committment..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
3. Same reason the possibility of Iraq being invaded was good for Bush
in 2002.

The sheeple buy into the talking pints, just like they did in 2002.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bush was AWOL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. I don't think it will work
Edited on Mon Jul-19-04 09:14 PM by Bush was AWOL
Bush is generally percieved as a liar these days beyond his loonie wingnut followers. I think it will be like the "boy who cried wolf". When he starts claiming how dangerous Iran is a lot of the independents and moderates who fell for his lies during the build-up to the Iraq war won't buy it this time around. This is not good for Bush, imo, and I seriously doubt his advisors are dumb enough to start another war before the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noahmijo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
4. It makes Bush totally look like a buffoon
Especially seeing how Iran to my knowledge is a country whose laws revolve around Islamic fundamentalism, we were attacked by Muslim fundamentalists, yet shrub decided to invade a country which has a habit of killing and torturing Islamic fundamentalists who threaten to overthrow the dictator in power.

Then we discover that shrub has certain ties with Muslim fundamentalists in Saudia Arabia, and as it turns out they don't like Saddam much either....hmmmm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 09:14 PM
Response to Original message
6. It is spin and an effort to distract the people from the election and
make * appear to be the "war president" he professes to be. They hope to get the folks all worked up and force Kerry and Edwards to return to the Senate to block the efforts to get congress to give them another resolution like they did for Iraq.

Contrary to the opinions shared by many on this board, Congress did not give * a blank resolution and say blow up whoever you like that you think was involved in 9/11.

The resolution that provided for the use of force in Iraq, HJR 114 provides specifically for use of force in Iraq. Iran has never been discussed.

Do you think that congress or the people will believe the intel that is being pushed by * considering the fact that the intel re Iraq was so bad? Even if it is coming from the 9/11 commission, there are still doubts and folks are not real happy with Iraq. They want their folks home.

Iran does have nuclear weapons. The only way we will wage war on them is if they attack us (which maybe something goofy cooks up in Iraq). Right now I think it is just the repukes efforts to make him look hawkish and to pull K&E from the campaign trail.

IMHO :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bush was AWOL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 09:36 PM
Response to Original message
7. I have one more question...
Would Iran be a tougher oppenent than Iraq? This may sound like a dumb question, but I can't find any information where I can make a comparison.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maggrwaggr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Iran would be tougher than Iraq by powers of ten
We pretty much destroyed Saddam's army and kept kicking it once it was down.

Saddam Hussein was basically the Mayor of Baghdad by the time we did our heroic "invasion".

Invading Iran would be pure insanity.

That's why George will use nukes. Much quicker, efficient, just press a few buttons and BINGO. Millions dead, cities destroyed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zydeco Donating Member (152 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 10:12 PM
Response to Original message
8. I think it is time to write all (Dems and Pugs)
congressional representatives and swamp them with letters. Letters should tell them to not give up our rights for them to decide about another preemptive strike for political reasons. At least to wait until we can get an adult in the white house.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Debs Donating Member (723 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 10:37 PM
Response to Original message
9. Lets not jump the gun
What I have read is that they allowed them transit and probably helped them travel but the CIA does not believe, or at least have evidence they had anything to do with 9/11, nor operational links with al Queda. It would make a lot more sense if they did than secular Iraq that was just ridiculous. Lets not, after being herded and rushed into blaming Iraq (probably most on this site never really bought that) jump to any conclusions before we see hard evidence that Iran was involved. It should go without saying we cannot simply take the Bush administrations word for it. If Bush told me the Sun had risen in the east I would go outside and look just to be sure
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 24th 2014, 04:21 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC