War with Iran!

[txaslftist]

Here's how it happens.

We've got 150,000 more or less troops in the immediate area. Right on Iran's doorstep.

We've got shrub's numbers in the toilet. He's not going to be able to sell a war vs. Iran to anyone, right?

Wrong. All he needs is a "Tonkin Gulf" incident. Something big enough that we HAVE TO respond. Something big enough that everyone says "Iran is directly responsible".

Why is our Air Force flying missions INTO Iranian airspace? Do we really need to see what they are doing when we have satellites tasked to watch that area down to the yard? Hell, no. Shrub's cabal is trying to provoke Iran into shooting one down.

The Iranians aren't buying what Shrub is selling, so it's going to have to be a really really big IED or something, directly linkable to Iran. Powell won't agree to shill that kind of garbage again, but someone will.

How do you get a war that according to the PNAC you desperately need to make this the American Century? It has to be a war that is forced on us. So MIHOP or LIHOP Iran into being the aggressor, then we roll toward Tehran.

Shit, he's still got three years to work out the details.

Feeling drafty in here to anyone?

[Nikki Stone 1]

1. Iran will HAVE to mean a draft

Public soldiers under private control?

[H2O Man]

2. Conflict with Iran

would not include ground troops. It could be an air attack on select targets, likely in coordination with another country. That other country can create an incident that "forces" the administration's hand. But invading with troops is not being considered.

[GreenPartyVoter]

5. "Nucular" shock and awe is on the way

------------------------------------------------------
URGENT yet easy! Hold the government accountable for Katrina's aftermath
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4736062

[H2O Man]

10. The nuclear drumbeats

are an attempt to intimidate Iran. They haven't had the desired affect. The US and another country may be intent on destroying select targets that are suspected of having potential/actual nuclear capabilities; however, that is the only nuclear consideration being seriously undertaken now. The "worst case" plans being released are not what the administration wants to do.

[txaslftist]

9. Sure it would.

You think Tehran is going to just sit there and get bombed when there are 150,000 ready-made US targets right next door in Iraq?

Those are ground troops in easy striking range of Tehran's long range missiles, to say nothing of their own ground forces.

[H2O Man]

11. While true,

that there are US troops next door, it would not follow that there are plans to invade Iran. The fact that they are there has to be taken into account as far as their being a target; this might be better viewed as one of the reasons the military isn't gung-ho on the neocons advocating a strike on Iran.

There are people inside the administration who have advocated air strikes on specific targets in Iran. There are no plans to invade with ground troops. None.

[txaslftist]

13. I'm talking about Iran's plans, not ours.

Our plans are fairly irrelevant. Saying we don't plan a ground engagement when we've people RIGHT THERE is like kicking a beehive and not planning on getting stung.

[H2O Man]

16. Nonsense.

You're "talking about Iran's plan's not ours," huh? Line that up with "saying we don't plan a ground engagement when we've people RIGHT THERE .." with your "talking about Iran's plans," please. Iran isn't "kicking a beehive" -- they are in their own homeland. There is plenty of information available on plans to strike Iran. Without having some basic knowledge, it is impossible to have insight at what is at risk right now. And the risk is too great for such speculation as expressed in parts of this thread.

[bloom]

3. They don't need a draft to drop nukes.

I don't know if they think if they threaten enough - that everyone will fall in line - or if they are crazy enough to do it.

The Katrina disgrace could have been a way of saying - we are evil enough to force our own people - our own babies - to starve and die of thirst - and we are evil enough to nuke the world.

[H5N1]

6. Does not matter what Iran does; bush will invade regardless

Same as Iraq (remember Iraq?).

[bloom]

8. Who says they would deal with Iran just like Iraq?

I don't think they can.

Iran hasn't been decimated with years of bombings and sanctions.

[txaslftist]

14. I don't think the fact that they can't accomplish it will stop them...

...from trying.

[H5N1]

15. at this time I am sure they still plan to invade Iran

Bush and the boys have a one track 'mind.'

[titoresque]

4. yep you're right!

and a Draft it will be! And that's when things are REALLY going to get
interesting on the home front. There might be enough dumbass repukes who will rally 'round the prez again....but send their kids to war?!
Nope! They'll jump ship, and we will see a civil war right here in the good 'ol US of A. It's going to get really ugly people.

[H5N1]

7. I think they will get drafted and go. Most Americans are spineless.

[LiberalEsto]

12. The USAF was flying bombing missions over Iraq

for MONTHS before we officially went to war against them. It was intended to "soften the targets" by destroying their ability to respond to our attack.


I don't doubt for a second that this is what's going on now in Iran.


The concept of officially declaring war is now meaningless, since this Misadministration is already covertly at war with its next enemy.