Will Bush & his friends launch a war against Iran as cover for '06?

[prolesunited]

With the scandals all coming to a head (and many in their party headed for jail or at least forced to step down), the populace waking up and poll numbers falling, and most worrisome the latest projections that voters favor Dems over them in the '06 elections. We only need 16 seats in the House and 6 in the Senate to take control. (A fact which pisses me off when I see all these Dems vowing to bolt the party when we are within reach, but that's an entirely different story.)

So, how desperate are they? I'm hearing the same war drums beating as in the lead up to Iraq.

Will they do it or are they bluffing? What would be the outcome?

[Beetwasher]

1. Why Not? No One Stopped Them in '02, And It Worked

What's to stop them from doing it again?

[havocmom]

2. Doubt it's a bluff

They are in a corner. Cheney will not just give up power and go to prison. Big war, big emergency, big time power grab... no more worries about special prosecutors or pesky details about pretending it's a democracy.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

3. Bush and what army?

Seriously, I don't see how he could invade Iowa right now, let alone Iran.

[bigscott]

5. well,

actually we dont need the army when we have the air force and the navy - bombings and cruise missles would do a lot of damage, then all they have to do is wait for the flood of enlistees to come along to fight the "next Patriotic War on Terra":rofl:

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

14. I'm still curious to see...

...what our air force and navy can do against an enemy that has the capacity to fight back. They haven't engaged an enemy like that since Vietnam. Iran, on the other hand, has the capacity to fight back against surface ships and airplanes, if not cruise missiles. If you will recall, the Iraqi government was also able to survive our cruise missile and air attacks, only to fall to pieces during the ground offensive. I am beginning to doubt that we can play the same tricks again and again. I'm sure the Iranians have plans for keeping their government and nuclear program safe in the face of a US sea/air attack. They're nowhere near as stupid as Saddam.

[CJCRANE]

7. They could do it the same as they did in Afghanistan -

carpet bombing + air cover + internal opposition + covert ops.

(i.e. "a proxy war")

on edit: This was a prediction in an article posted on DU a few months ago.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

13. No they couldn't.

Iran has a functioning central government, a functioning air defense system, a functioning military, and a functioning economy. Afghanistan had none of those things (or had them just barely) when we went to war. Iran is not occupied by a proxy militia supported by another, more powerful country. I don't think the same model would work. I don't even think the Bosnia model would work. The Iranian military and government is far more powerful. Iran was able to hold off Iraq back when Iraq had the largest army in the world, chemical weapons, and the support of the United States.

[Warren Stupidity]

19. Iran was also able to attack baghdad with rockets.

As the war dragged on towards its standoff end both Iraq and Iran were lobbing missiles at each other's capitals. The Green Zone might be invulnerable to insurgent ground forces but it probably is not safe from this sort of attack.


But I assume that the bush regime would welcome a new and bloody crisis.

[Maggie_May]

4. There will be some action

I don't know what. I just I know that this was all in there plan. I really think that was the reason that we went into Iraq was to also get our foot into Iran. The problem now is Iran got smart and starting getting ready for us. The second problem is Iraq is not stabilized which leaves us fighting a war in Iraq and Iran which has cause a huge problem for them. I know this sound stupid and I don't know much about war stuff but would leaving Saddam in keep Iran kind of in check?

[terryg11]

6. mistake on their part

I agree that alot of the language coming out of the White House on the subject of Iran is pretty strong and they seem to be posturing for some sort of military action. A big BUT here, it would be a mistake. We haven't finished business in Afghanistan and Iraq and this is one subject the American peoople are aware of (less so on Afghanistan but it still makes the news once ina while) and will be pissed if we commit troops to another action while struggling in Iraq

[PATRICK]

9. Mistake or not

and totally regardless of anything about the current situation today they SEEM to be operating coolly and
unchangeably as if it all part of a natural, old plan. Nothing at all seems to have changed in that regardless of who is sweating out indictments here. No changes, no panic, no desperation, no reaching for pretexts or allies. It seems like after Iraq it all smoothly repeating on remote control.

That is the undefinable sense of things unfolding about Iran and the rest of the world seems on a desultory remote control jockeying for petty advantages all the way. The lack of drama will hinder the buildup of a peace movement or dramatic UN votes. The air strike that will precipitate a chain of events(rather than the full scale advertised Iraq invasion) will come suddenly with no PR resistance. Then the game will be engaged and as far as resistance or suffering, Bushco shrugs.

What is scary besides world impotence and brainlessness, is how deliberate and unfazed the administration is going through the motions toward yet another war crime.

[Warren Stupidity]

8. It will require a preceding 'enabling incident'.

The current situation is insufficient cover. The administration needs a much deeper crisis to get them through '06 and '08.

[PATRICK]

10. Or not.

Our own self-justified missile strike, like Sharon's march on Temple Mount, will bring about a chain of action and reaction that will always lead to American escalation on our part. This is broadly the GOP way of strategy. You yourself commit a crime that will itself be used as a pretext for another crime. What looks nutty to any sane observer will be covered by the nutty legitimacy of a truly insane media blitz here and insufficient reasoning and moral compass abroad.

As with planting WMD's- which they did try and even though discovered by people who would not go along, I would not rule out a MIHOP incident considering everything. But those pesky people who don't go along and not having it work is very obviously something they have learned not to depend on- and it does not matter. Probably never did.

[Warren Stupidity]

11. Yeah you could be right.

The resulting chaos from an air attack could be then used as a justification for further bullshit, and circular justification for the initial bullshit.

One thing I think is fairly certain: they intend to do something to reframe the debate before the 06 campaign gets going.

[PATRICK]

12. Routine effort

Success does not depend on how much frantic effort they put in. They screw things up worse then. But they get away in the end with everything and so are becoming very comfortable with the "risk taking".

That means of course, never ever surrendering control. Whole generations must then die before some future buffoon slips up and forgets his true power base. Maybe. In any event the future calls for a toilet flush or overflowing the government.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

15. On the other hand,

the President of Iran seems to have an itch trigger finger, too. He seems far too ready to give them their incident. What a fucking mess.

[Warren Stupidity]

16. Yes indeed they trot him out once a week

for his obligatory inflammatory statement. What does that tell you? It tells me that the best thing that happened to the Iranian Theocracy in the last ten years was our idiotic invasion of Iraq. It tells me that the Iranians, far from fearing US aggression, are perhaps eager partners (in coincidental convergence of interests) in the conflagration we seem determined to bring to the region.

[prolesunited]

17. Yep, I don't see them doing a first strike this time

but I think they are provoking things. I vaguely remember reading something about fly-overs and infiltrations along the border. If anybody has a link, please post it.

All they need is one trigger-happy Iranian and it's go time.

[yurbud]

18. discontent in pentagon and CIA might limit them--or not...