The Next War - Bolten's Plan For Bush's Political Recovery Points to Iran

[kpete]

Be Prepared
By Matthew Yglesias

I missed this until Mark flagged it, but Time's report on Josh Bolten's plan for political recovery says ratcheting up tensions with Iran is point four on the plan: "Presidential advisers believe that by putting pressure on Iran, Bush may be able to rehabilitate himself on national security, a core strength that has been compromised by a discouraging outlook in Iraq. 'In the face of the Iranian menace, the Democrats will lose,' said a Republican frequently consulted by the White House." I haven't done fresh reporting on this subject in a little while, but as of a couple of months ago at least, Democrats on the Hill and involved in the midterm campaigns struck me as totally in denial about the high likelihood of being forced to grapple with this issue in a high-profile way.

It's not 100 percent obvious to me what the right way to do this is, but mainly I think Democrats ought to steal a page from the Social Security playbook and lay down a firm marker. As I wrote a couple weeks ago, the policy question has a simple answer: "Should we go to war with Iran? The short answer is 'no.' The long answer is 'hell no.'

more at:
http://www.tpmcafe.com/node/29369
and From Josh Marshall
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/008333.php

[Hubert Flottz]

1. Just like Iraq, war in Iran is bound to be waged for GOP politics...

Blood for votes...What a price to pay for the GOP to win. Bush's "Noble Cause" in Iraq was to win elections by any means. Casey died so bush could WIN!

[spanone]

2. Bush* will Kill as many as it takes for political gains.

[peaches2003]

3. Just about to post the same

He has no problem sending our kids (not his) off to get killed in Iran and, as with Iraq, the reason is for his own political gain with his loony base.

[Coastie for Truth]

4. Disaster Preparedness = Defense Preparedness

Same Hierarchical Organization
Same Paradigms of Command, Communications Control
Same Mass Logistics Management
Same Types of Operation Planning and
Same Organizational Skills


The Venn Diagram Overlap <> of the preparation and skills for (1) a mass natural disaster and (2) a military operation is a classical "Boolean AND" <> and neither Rummie nor Chertoff have their SXXT together.

Sad to say, as we go through the 2006 Hurricanes, from Alberto and Beryl and Chris through Debby and and Ernesto to Florence and Gordon and Helene to Isaac and Joyce and Kirk and Leslie and Michael and Nadine and Oscar and Patty and Rafael and Sandy and Tony and Valerie and William when will the gross incompetence of Rummie and Chertoff and Chimpie be proven beyond any doubt - even for Bushie's core? I think when the first "Big One" hits the Southeast - unless the San Andreas Fault shakes and rolls first (of course, that's only California).

How did Rummie Do On Iraq?
How did Chertoff Do On Katrina?


I run around with a lot of "Reagan Democrats" -- and Katrina was the last straw for these guys.

[Hubert Flottz]

5. K&R...

The next kid to die for the glory of having a GOP War President, may be your own kid.

[enough]

6. K&R

[bananas]

7. k&r nt

[KAT119]

8. K&R!

[Bucky]

9. The game plan is to TALK about Iran, not invade it

We really still lack the manpower to do Iran like it would need to be done. We've scraped and skidded our way thru Iraq with about one third the personnel needed for that job and our commitment there is not going to be lightened anytime in the near future. Part of the high death tolls there is a testiment to the lack of sufficient US manpower. We simply lack the troops today to invade Iran--and Iran knows this.

The worst the Bushies can do is bomb Iran--and they're not going to do that before the election, or they lose it as an issue. If they act before the election, they'll have nothing left. Hill Democrats will predictably rally round the president on this issue unless it becomes painfully obvious that an attack was unnecessary. So they can lose on it before the election, but they can't win on it.

After the election is the only time Bush could consider attacking Iran. But after he gets stomped in the election, it would look desparate to hit Iran with missiles. Their only power is in the empty bluff. Once they lose that, they are politically dead. None of the Bushies stayed out of Vietnam because they lacked the instinct for self preservation.

Plus by now they can't be ignorant about the potential backlash in the international community--Blair, their last ally standing, has already sent out numerous signals that an attack on Iran is simply not a consideration. Like Joe McCarthy, they can only continue to scare us with boogeymen as long as no boogeymen get caught.

There's plenty of things to worry about from this administration. An attack on Iran--much less an invasion--is not one of those things.

[Stinky The Clown]

10. Mixing bullshit and ill preparedness is a sign of very dangerous times

Add a dash of bluster and we have a recipe for gourmet disaster.

I'm disinclined to think we'll actually go to war with Iran. The Dems, it seems to me, have that covered. They're opposed. They've said they're opposed. They've called for diplomacy.

The American people are waaaaaay over Bush's war and never want to see that war woody rise in his pants again. And if it pops up, I have a feeling they'll call for making him a eunuch.

Then there's the small matter of an overstretched and near broken military, with a uniformed leadership on the verge of mutiny.

Oh ... there's also those pesky Iranian allies. Remember them? China, who holds half our fucking debt? And Russia, under Putin, into whose eyes Georgie looked and got punked.

I just don't think they can get away with another war.

And the alternatives to an actual war aren't much better.

Get Israel to bomb something and we get swarms of pissed off Arabs coming over their borders ...... and ours. The righties will be ***begging*** Jose to come back.

Get us to drop that bunkerbuster and we get missles in return.

Nope ..... Geogie's got no place to run. The people who call the shots may want it, but the people who execute the orders may just decide not to.

However, if even one point in my calculus is off .... we're fucking toast.

Very scary times, indeed.

But as a political plan? This is just plain nuts ..... even for purely political reasons. No one will buy this idea excapt the 32% left in the glass ...... the backwash, as Colbert so now famously called them, just last night.

[leveymg]

11. Is DU Becoming a Bulletin Board for War Propagada? Comment & Proposal

You may have noticed in recent weeks a mounting volume of DU posts that carry messages that attack Iran. This has become a particular problem in Lastest Breaking News, where inflamatory headlines are repeated verbatim. This has given DU the appearance of a bulletin board for anti-Iran propaganda. The community and Admin have to ask ourselves, is this a good thing? If not, what can be done to address the problem?

Before I propose a solution for discussion, allow me to illustrate the problem. In the last few days, we've seen the following headlines pop up at DU: "Iran procures new missiles capable of hitting Europe"; "Iran defies UN, continues nuclear fuel enrichment"; "Reuters: Iran will harm US interests if attacked"; "Turkey Refuses U.S. Request To Allow Attack On Iran From Turkish Base". Just type in "Iran" in the Search function, thread title only, and see it yourself.

All of these are dubious propositions in various ways, but that's not really the point here.

Last night, the following post appeared. While it was contained within the Israel/Palestine forum, the site of so much rhetorical overkill, it struck a raw nerve for me.
_______________________________________________________
(87 posts) Sun Apr-30-06 11:28 PM

Original message
(Israeli PM) Olmert: Ahmadinejad is 'psychopath' who 'speaks like Hitler'
By Haaretz Service

Interim Prime Minister Ehud Olmert launched an unprecedented attack on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in an interview with a German newspaper published Saturday, labelling him an anti-Semitic "psychopath" who "speaks like Hitler."

Olmert told Bild newspaper that the Iranian president "is a psychopath of the worst kind. He speaks like Hitler did of the extermination of the entire Jewish nation."

"I hope that he will never become so dangerous and destructive, like Adolf Hitler was," Olmert goes on. "I hope he never gets the chance to transfer his threats into the deeds, but if one wants to judge a statesman based on his words, I can say Ahmadinejad speaks today as Hitler spoke before the seizure of power."


The prime minister said that it was the duty of the entire world to work together to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.



.../more http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/710812.html

(The OP goes on to comment, below)

"Official anti-semitism is alive and well in 2006,

at the highest of levels,

in the land of Persia that once had a Jewish Queen,

too bad shes not still around to yet again save the Jews from annihilation .

Oh well i guess we will have to rely on the IDF , yet again.....(thankfully)"
___________________________________________________________

The message I get from this, both from Ohmert and the OP, is that Iran wants to destroy Israel - Israel must destroy Iran. That's also more or less the message that's being broadcast by much of the MSM. Others may disagree, but this is war propaganda, a form of Hate Speech. It matters not at all that it's carried by "legitimate" newspapers. It's still war propaganda, and should be identified as such if it is to appear at DU.

Bush Plans to Channel Iran War Sentiment to Retain GOP Control of Congress.

This morning we see confirmation that Iran war fever is part of a White House orchestrated political campaign. KPete, who has done so much to keep us informed, has a post this morning at The Greatest:
___________________________________________________________________________________
The Next War - Bolten's Plan For Bush's Political Recovery Points to Iran
Edited on Sun Apr-30-06 05:41 PM by kpete
Be Prepared
By Matthew Yglesias

I missed this until Mark flagged it, but Time's report on Josh Bolten's plan for political recovery says ratcheting up tensions with Iran is point four on the plan: "Presidential advisers believe that by putting pressure on Iran, Bush may be able to rehabilitate himself on national security, a core strength that has been compromised by a discouraging outlook in Iraq. 'In the face of the Iranian menace, the Democrats will lose,' said a Republican frequently consulted by the White House." I haven't done fresh reporting on this subject in a little while, but as of a couple of months ago at least, Democrats on the Hill and involved in the midterm campaigns struck me as totally in denial about the high likelihood of being forced to grapple with this issue in a high-profile way.

It's not 100 percent obvious to me what the right way to do this is, but mainly I think Democrats ought to steal a page from the Social Security playbook and lay down a firm marker. As I wrote a couple weeks ago, the policy question has a simple answer: "Should we go to war with Iran? The short answer is 'no.' The long answer is 'hell no.'

more at:
http://www.tpmcafe.com/node/29369
and From Josh Marshall
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/008333.php
_________________________________________________________________


The Bush Administration wants us to think war with Iran is coming, but they can't actually execute it.

Given the disaster in Iraq, the U.S. is in no position to start a war in Iran. Up and down the ranks. the troops and intelligence officers know we can not win a war militarily and politically against Iran, for precisely the same reason we can't "win" in Iraq. Please, see,

This is an elaborate pyswar campaign, and it is largely a partisan political one directed at the American people to get us into an hysterical war fever that the White House hopes will help the GOP in November. And, by those terms, the campaign is working.

We should not play into their game by allowing DU to become a bulletin board for war propaganda. We also shouldn't proclaim that war is somehow invetitable, and the world is coming to an end. That's just a role that's been programmed for the Left in this high-stakes political game.

I believe the best thing to do is to say this propaganda campaign is BS. Say it loudly, and often, and maybe, maybe, the American people will see this for what it is: the crudest form of power politics.

Therefore, I propose the following: Coverage of Iran should go into a separate forum. That forum should include a disclaimer, like the following:

READER ADVISORY: Much of what appears in the corporate media about threats from Iran is unreliable, as is information about Iraq. DU does not endorse the accuracy of the following information, even if the source material appeared in a normally reputable media outlet.

This may be part of the solution to the intensive troll campaign posting Iran war propaganda we have seen at DU in recent months.

Thank you for your consideration of this comment and proposal.

I hope the DU community and Admin carefully consider this proposal.