If Bush Survives 2006

[NashVegas]

Iran in 2007.

Just a hunch.

[carolinalady]

1. Do you really think he will wait that long? n/t

[NashVegas]

5. Yes

The Monday morning QBs claimed a large part of the reason GHWB was defeated in 1992 was because the Gulf War was over and done in 1991.

I think all those who said we'd be in and out of Iraq this time were lying through their teeth.

[KingFlorez]

2. You can count on it

That is why it is critical to defeat the Republicans in 2006

[C_U_L8R]

3. It's looking tight

for 2005.

He might just squeek by
but I don't think he'll last much longer
into the new year.

he just cooked his own goose
by breaking the law.
Stupid man.

[Silverhair]

4. Doubtful.

The political price would be too high. I Iran does something stupidly provocative., then all bets are off.

[NashVegas]

6. Nukes, Israel

Iran right now would have to be bonkers to not wish to have a nuclear weapon (it's done wonders for North Korea and Pakistan). That gives the Security Council cause. Then you have Ahmadinijad talking smack left and right ...

[carolinalady]

8. What about Israel? Shrub may make the bullets and talk them

into firing. Then we would be obligated to support our "friend and ally".

[Tom Joad]

9. It is "our friend and ally" that introduced weapons of mass destruction

to the Middle East. Unless you count when the US carried them there on warships.
Free Vanunu!

[Doctor_J]

13. High political price?

You're joking, right? The guy's admitted to breaking a number of important laws, and is still standing. Why would starting another unprovked war do him any damage??

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[951-Riverside]

7. But for that to happen he will need another 9-11

:nuke: :freak: :scared:

[Telly Savalas]

10. My hunch is there will never be an invasion of Iran.

[NashVegas]

11. I Would Love for Your Hunch to Beat Out My Hunch

What's it based on?

[Telly Savalas]

12. A number of things.

Even if he could conjure up the personnel and cash to support such an operation (which is a big if), the American public wouldn't put up with it. Approval for his handling of Iraq is at about 35% right now, so a new military adventure would be extremely unpopular. The White House may not give a shit about this, but the Republican party at large does.

Too many people have too much money at stake to allow them to do something patently absurd. (Yes, the Bush Administration has done a lot of goofy stuff in the last 5 years, but if goofiness could be quantified, the goofiness of an invasion of Iran would exceed the aggregate goofiness of all that came before it.)

I've been hearing prophecies of an Iran invasion for over a year at DU, and I don't see how we're one step closer to it than we were last election day.

On edit: Notice that he can't even exercise the political clout to get his Destruction of Social Security project off the ground. If he can't do that, how's he gonna sell another war?

[CatholicEdHead]

14. Don't need to invade

Just do some air strikes possibly including neuclear veapons.

/Chekov

[Telly Savalas]

15. He'd still be treading thin politcal ice to order air strikes...

and the fallout from using nukes (pun intended) would be more than they could handle. (Just apply the reasoning from post #12 to this.)

[BlueIris]

16. Glad to see I'm not the only one.

Since this thread didn't get locked, I'm going to assume it's okay to post my assessment of what went down--something got screwed up for Bush Co. around mid-June. I could explain why I think "it" was supposed to happen by that date, but--those of you who know to what I refer know why mid-June was significant. The people who ultimately say yay or nay to these kinds of projects (read: H.W. and friends) backed out at the last second and pulled the plug. People ask how anything like the kind of negligence that permitted Katrina and Wilma could have happened--there was no plan for governing this nation past June of 2005. After that time, Bush expected to be enforcing the next draft and that was it. But now--my guess is that there won't be "another 9/11" to justify an attack on Iran. The neo-cons' backers know Bush and Cheney are simply too weak and unpopular for that part of the plan to be successful right now. Of course, someone needs to tell people like Porter Goss that it just isn't going to happen--he's still scurrying about in places like Turkey, pretending that all systems are go.