open Democracy News Analysis - war - Comments

englishman on "Five Easy Pieces to Iran - a Warning!"

englishman — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 22:40:09 +0100

Of course it is a bit like WOMD. I remember arguing that I did not think Saddam had any significant WOMD and people saying he did; some still think he did, but we just have not found them yet. It is similar with this. In several years, when there still has not been a war with Iran, there will be people saying it will still happen. I note you are wiggling, Wiggly, by saying if not Bush2, the Clinton2. I was talking Bush here because that was what the original post was being so definite about. So when Bush's term ends with no war, I trust you will acknowledge I was right :-)

Brendan 2 on "Five Easy Pieces to Iran - a Warning!"

Brendan 2 — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:44:05 +0100

Quote:

would not rule out however, a limited strike to pre-empt an Iranian nuclear attack (that most of you don't believe would happen anyway).

Most of us are aware of your delusional fixation on that, yes.

Iron Mike on "Five Easy Pieces to Iran - a Warning!"

Iron Mike — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 19:32:47 +0100

Quote:

Number if times America has been attacked in its just over 200 year history? 1 (Pearl Harbor).

You need to brush up on your American History. Forget 9/11 already? Forget USS Cole? African Embassy bombing? The 1993 attack on the World Trade Center? An attack on American security interests is an attack on America itself.

Islamofascism declared war on America and on 9/11 awakened the sleeping giant. (I know how much everyone loves that cliche--too bad its true)

Arming Iraqi insurgencies and exporting EFPs is more than "meddling." The fact remains that war with Iran is highly unlikely for political, logistical, and economic reasons. I would not rule out however, a limited strike to pre-empt an Iranian nuclear attack (that most of you don't believe would happen anyway).

Wiggly on "Five Easy Pieces to Iran - a Warning!"

Wiggly — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 08:34:03 +0100

Political suicide?

What, like removing habeas corpus, adding torture to official policy, illegally wiretapping at home or invading foreign countries under false pretences?

Entering WW2 was political suicide, with 80% of the poplace against it - until allowing the heavily provoked Japan to destroy the fleet at Pearl Harbor (having moved the aircraft carriers out of the way first).

Then there were plenty of volunteers and anyone disagreeing was "a traitor", which reminds me of that famous quote about how any nation can be led into war.

No, Bush will not openly decide to attack in cold blood, heck the decision was made long ago, he will instead "retaliate", "defend", "react to", "stand firm", "strike back" blah blah against the "aggression" of Iran.

What will be allowed to happen this time?

Perhaps "satellite pictures" will be paraded of Iranians "meddling with" Iraq.

Meddling with Iraq!? What kind of low-life scum would meddle with Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, or indeed Vietnam, Korea, Cuba, all of South America, some bits repeatedly...

Number if times America has been attacked in its just over 200 year history? 1 (Pearl Harbor).

Number of times America has "meddled" abroad? Just over 200.

Do the math - of course America "will" attack Iran, it's already doing so right now. What's truly horrific is that people still, to this day, think it comes down to Bush alone, or even just the neocons. If Bush II doesn't, Clinton II will.

You know, they'll "need to".

englishman on "Five Easy Pieces to Iran - a Warning!"

englishman — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 23:54:38 +0100

This is like Jehovas Witnesses predicting the end is nigh then having to keep revising the date. There has been too much dodgy "evidence" about this. I read a "transcript" of a phone call that was allegedly made by a woman sailor aboard a US ship in the ME. It seemed plausible until you realise that the transcript was of a telephone conversation with a friend who had to have taped the conversation in order to have reproduced it word for word. Some friend. On re-reading it read like a piece of fiction though and did not quite ring true. It was also perhaps a little unlikely that a serving crewmember would say the things she did and assume there was nobody listening. Well I can't be sure, but I would say it was faked.

There are plenty who would promote this view and it does no harm to GWB who would like as many as possible to believe he would bomb Iran. Especially the Iranians.

Well I can't be sure, of course, but it seems like a politically suicidal move for Bush and any who would support him. It would be a very bad move for the USA too, and would isolate the USA politically from many of her western allies. Even if you think Bush is that daft, most of his advisors are not. They may be devious and have hidden agendas, but they are not stupid.

We will see.