I think Bush's nuke threats are 90% bullshit

[Atman]

Think about it...the very public display of mushroom cloud coming to Nevada this week. All this talk of lighting up Iran like a candle.

It is chest-thumping. If Bush were really planning to nuke Iran, why would he make such a public spectacle of it? He is giving them warnings, trying to demonstrate he's a tough guy and not afraid to use his weapons.

That said, I do believe these old chickenhawks want to see what all this firepower will do, just once, before they check out and descend into hell. They've spent trillions of dollars and years and years of work building this massive infrastructure to support their killing machines, and they've never actually been allowed to use them. It's like a pyro kid building a pipe bomb in the garage. The fun isn't in building it. The fun is in seeing it go boom.

So, on one hand I think the old school chickenhawks, who have no firsthand knowledge of the horrors of war, wanna play some more war. OTOH, BushCo needs to send a credible threat to Iran. But I really have a hard time believing that the troops and the generals won't revolt. We've grown up being taught that whoever launches the first one will essentially be launching the LAST one, because hell will quite literally break lose once this happens. And they're going to do it for some ass-clown who doesn't even command the support of 35% of the American people.

This whole think stinks. A more reasonable explanation is to work it all out with Iran behind the scenes, but loudly trumpet Bush's strength and invincibility as a "leader" and "war hero" before the 2006 elections.


Dear lord, I hope I'm right.

[valerief]

1. I think the cabal is planning another 9-11, n/t

[Cleita]

34. Me too, but I hope I'm right in thinking that there are

too many eyes watching to get away with it this time.

[valerief]

37. Heck, the world is watching. We need help from those with power

to do something. I know we can't advocate a new *Boston Tea Party* because it's violent, but it did get the job done, didn't it?

[Beelzebud]

2. It's called sabre rattling. Get ready for a new cold war.

That is all this fool will accomplish by this. Every rouge nation on earth is going to make getting nukes their number 1 priority to deter us.

Basically our idiot in chief is recreating the cold war, only this time, he's doing it with religious fanatics...

[tsuki]

3. Bush and his conservative base are crazy enough to do something

like this.

[TahitiNut]

4. Meanwhile, Social Security privatization is embedded in the budget bill.

Distract, divide, rape, pillage, rinse, repeat.

[Atman]

6. The budget bill which didn't pass, right?

Let's hope the newly emboldened dems keep on their toes and stop this shit.

[TahitiNut]

12. It's the biggest obsession on the right wing. Trillions. They get woodies

... just thinking about it. I'm convinced they'll stop at absolutely nothing to get their slimy tentacles on that trust fund. As January 2007 draws closer and, with it, a diminishing chance that's the best they've had in 60 years, they'll get more and more desperate.

[ninkasi]

46. I have no doubt at all that you're right...

What is it, though, that makes people who are already wealthy beyond my comprehension want even more? They want it so much they're willing to destroy the lives of we lesser beings, and condemn so many to poverty, and they already have enough money to last several lifetimes. I can't understand greed and arrogance that pathological.

It sickens me to realize that our country is in the control of these sociopaths. As you point out, they will get more and more desperate.

[AlamoDemoc]

8. Hear Hear!

[salin]

5. what is so bothersome, is your last comment...

because sanity would preclude such an action.

But the 'Dear lord,...' comment suggests that you, too, feel there is something unhinged in these folks and that the normal sane restraints just may not apply. That one gets me, too. Rational side - no way they could do this... than niggling side... 'Dear lord....'

[earthside]

7. Sadly, You're Probably Wrong

Every new revelation about Bush's involvement in intelligence leaks, every new memo from Britain about the lies for war, every new poll showing the radical Republicans in deep political trouble --- makes it more necessary for Bush and Rove to do something very dramatic to save themselves.

Start a war to win an election? They've done it before.

[charlyvi]

9. I don't.

Shrub is just the type of baby to think if he goes down, the rest of the nation, possibly the world, should go down with him.

[bullimiami]

10. i dont know. they did all of the same out loud chest thumping re iraq

and look what we got.

[Atman]

13. Not nukes, though.

Nukes have NEVER been an option. No credible "war" strategist considers nukes a "first-strike" option. They are a "last resort" option because of the unchecked disaster they will unleash. First strikes with conventional weapons, sure. BushCo has proved themselves here. But NUKES?

Again, though...why give them all this time to nuke us first by making these plans so public? Doesn't pass the smell test. "We're about to wipe out your country and kill millions of your people. Please stand still, 'kay?" I just doesn't pass the smell test.

[Lerkfish]

16. we also never considered preemptive attacks of aggression based on lies

but lo and behold.


I wish I could live in your pollyanaish world, but sadly, the reality of the insanity of this administration is proven and reproven daily.

[Atman]

18. You don't need to insult me.

Pollyannaish? Did you even read my posts? I'll wait if you'd like. Or I can fire back some lame insults of my own. I'd prefer to keep the discussion on a grown-up level, though.

[Lerkfish]

42. insult not intended.

was referencing the idea that they would never consider using nuclear weapons to be living in a pollyannish world: one where all people are inherently good and evil is something that never occurs.

I did read your posts, btw, but sorry if you felt insulted. I'm commenting on how IMHO its naive to think that morals or sanity is any barrier to this administration.

[earthside]

24. Tactical Nukes.

According to Hersh, they are planning on the use of tactical nuclear weapons, ie, 'bunker busters', which makes sense if you are the Strangelove-types in the Bush/Rumsfeld Pentagon.

Nevertheless, I agree, whether tactical or strategic, using nukes will unleash consequences that are simply unimaginable.

As to the point: "... why give them all this time to nuke us first by making these plans so public?" Well, the Iranians don't have a nuclear weapon and they wouldn't have one even if they wanted one for another ten years!
See: Iran Is Judged 10 Years From Nuclear Bomb - Washington Post, August 2, 2005

As Mike Malloy continues to point out, you cannot understand these people if you are reasonable and rational ... which is why I think that Bush attacking Iran is very probable.

[salin]

36. Ya, but these folks work more from a short-term political framework

rather than from a military tactis framework, nor a policy discussion (weighing positives and negatives) framework - and they are getting very, very desperate to find a way to pull the American people back behind them. If in their desperation they amplified the belief among themselves, that doing this would make the american public uniformly beholden to them (ala they got rid of the big bad Iranian threat), no telling whether or not any rationale minds would point out the many, many reasons that they should not do it.

Their MO is to make threats and broadcast their intentions. They did this with both Afghanistan and Iraq. And per giving them time to nuke us first? I thought it was widely accepted that they don't actually have any nukes (yet), and that this would be "preemptive" to prevent nuke capabilities from becoming nukes (their arguments) and thus they couldn't fire anything at us - or at a closer ally.

I go back and forth as to whether or not I think they are blowing steam, or likely to do nothing. Intellect says they won't do it - too many real constraints. HOwever there are times when the niggling senses makes me worry about the lack of restraints they have demonstrated time and time again - and their ability to read things that they cull intentionally to read a particular way - and then decide that is reality and to act on that reality - all real concerns be damned.

[Lars39]

52. The nukes are on the table because Iran has a working Air Force.

[xchrom]

11. nuke threats? probably. bombing iran's

possible nuclear sites -- well, well within the realm of probability.

[mdmc]

14. I'm sure that you are right. Or the end is near

either way... it is all good.

[Lerkfish]

15. right. and people told me Iraq was chest-thumping right up until we

invaded.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. I think you are wrong

and we are going to bomb Iran... you stated why... these assholes, startign with Rummy, have NEVER used them nukes. Rummy has been itching to use one since 1973... this is HIS BEST CHANCE and the world be dammned

[Atman]

21. Okay, I'll say it again...NUKES

You and others keeps saying, "sure we'll bomb Iran." I'm not talking about "bombing Iran." I don't doubt for a minute that we would bomb Iran without provocation. Bush has indeed proven his insanity on this one. I am talking NUKES.

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. Yes I AM talking NUKES

we will use them as a first strike option. Why? These idiots are hot headed and want to use them, and THEY HAVE THEM... and they have a HARD ON to use them.

The world will change the day they attack Iran, for we will become the pariah of the world community. Hell, MABUS may be very real and the "war on terra" might as well last the 27 years.

By the way, before all this started with the bush boys I would have said the same. These days I don't pass anything about them. That includes the pre-emtive use of nuclear weapons to ahem, prevent another country from developing a nuclear weapon. After all that has happened it is foolish to think they won't

[Metta]

19. I think it's 100% as escalated by his rhetoric.

Just another example of betraying his responsibility to bring peace and healing, uh, the usual Christian values.

[BrklynLiberal]

20. I would put NOTHING past this SCORPION! including war to stop elections.

It Is My Nature Said the Scorpion - The Chimperor as Scorpion

A scorpion needs to cross a river to get to his usual whereabouts, having been lost way out in the wilderness for quite some time. Scorpions can't swim, so it has to find another way across. There are no bridges or stepping stones in sight, and the river is far too wide to jump. Searching the surroundings, the scorpion meets a turtle. It asks the turtle for a ride across the big river. "Not a chance. You'll sting me, and I won't be able to swim, and then I will drown," the turtle replies. "I've got a family to take care of." The scorpion acknowledges the turtle's concern for his family, but assures him that he has nothing to fear. "You see, I would drown also, as you sink. It would be very stupid of me to sting you," the scorpion argues in a convincing manner.

So the turtle considers. After giving the situation some thought, it becomes pure scientific logic to the turtle. What can be more valuable than ones life, or the lives of your loved ones? The turtle asks the scorpion if it too has a family. "Certainly I have, and their well-being is more dear to me than anything else in this world." The scorpion pulls out a worn picture of his family and points out the family members to the turtle. The scorpion talks in a gentle voice, and by the look of its posture, it seems very sincere. "Please," the scorpion begs, "please help me to get back home." A desperate look spreads across the face of the scorpion as its thoughts wanders to its home soil. "There is no-one here but you to help me," the scorpion continues to argue. Touched by this concern for family matters, the turtle finally agrees to carry the scorpion across the big wide river.

Once in the water, the waves are tough on the newfound friends, but the turtle keeps the pace up with great effort not to let his passenger down. Halfway across, the turtle suddenly feels the scorpion's terminal sting in his neck. "Why, why," it gasps as the venom paralyses it, "why did you do it?" They both begin to sink into the dark waters. "Damned if I know. Guess it's just in my nature," the scorpion replies. The river swallows both of them in an inevitable act of nature and the soul of the turtle rejoins its creator.

[alfredo]

23. bush sees no negative reaction to his actions. He knows that God

is guiding his hand, that his place in heaven is assured. Why should he worry about what the Christian Science Monitor or Sy Hersh may say about him?

[Trevelyan]

25. What is the other ten percent? I hope your conclusions are correct.

:scared: :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown: :nuke: :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown:

[etherealtruth]

26. With every fiber of my being I hope you are right ...

Sadly, my fears are rooted in the insanity that characterizes this administration (coupled with the sociopaths interspersed).

But...

I hope, pray (insert whatever) that your assessment is correct.

[Atman]

27. Age check, please!

How old are we here? Really.

I'm not looking for insults, not trying to insult anybody, but I am curious. Because I find it unfathomable that anyone MY age, who lived through nuke threats and the cold war would be able to so cavalierly suggest we'd just nuke a country without provocation. Do they study the effect of nuclear war in school anymore? Nuclear winter? MAD? You don't just lob a nuke. When you start, you better be prepared to open the gates to hell. Seriously.

So, what are the ages of the "Oh, he did it to Iraq, so he'll do it to Iran" posters? Because you seem to be missing the point, and perhaps lacking in a sense of history. Once you start lobbing nukes, all bets are off. There is NOTHING to be gained. You won't win elections, you won't "humiliate the enemy." You are beginning the end. And then even Halliburton won't make money, and their precious tax cuts and inheritences mean nothing.

And don't try to point to Japan...back then, we were the ONLY ONES with nukes. Now everybody and his brother have them. This is lunacy. I am thinking BushCo is hoping Iran will believe Bush is as crazy-loony as you guys do. I'm thinking BushCo will certainly drop massive conventional weapons on them. I don't believe even BushCo could be so blind to the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction to think there is anything to be gained by nuking anyone, ever, unless they were literally intending to end life on earth. Does anyone really think this is part of their game plan? Seriously?

[Rocknrule]

29. Yes

Bush wants to end all life on Earth. It's God's will, according to him. He wants to "liberate" us all by sending us to heaven.

[Atman]

30. Then why did he waste time with the tax cuts?

Nothing else he's done fits that scenerio. He could have easily just done this much earlier, without telling anyone, if he merely wanted to jump-start armeggedon.

[valerief]

38. So if * nuked Iran, you're saying some other country would

retaliate and nuke the US? What country is crazy enough to escalate such a war? There's only one USA.

[nadinbrzezinski]

33. I am fully aware of what happens

and if we were talking of RATIONAL MEN leading the nation I'd agree with you. Alas Bush did not study anything about nuclear winter in school and his war experience was defending US AIR SPACE against the Mexican Air Force... which at the time still flew P-47s... WW II era P-47s.

Look under ANY OTHER administration we would not even be having this conversation. With these boys, on the other hand, they believe we use some Tac Nukes that is the end of it...nobody will do much beyond protesting... and for our sake I hope that IS THE END of it. But once again, you are NOT talking of rational men at the wheels of government. What you are talking is of men who have been itching to use nukes, in one case from his statements, since 1973 (Rumsfeld).

[etherealtruth]

41. I'm probably of the age that you would consider ...

... should know better (44), but ...

I can't help envisioning the Chimp (as Jack Ripper) muttering about his precious bodily fluids ... It's not about how preposterous the idea is; for me its about how insane the Chimp is.

Could he become convinced that some kind of "small scale, targeted attack" could work and not effect KRB's profits? I don't know.

I hope and pray he is not religiously insane (just pandering) ...if he is, all bets are off.

As an aside: the after effects of nuclear war are not taught as much (in both quantity and quality) as in the past (from a mother's perspective).

[FlaGranny]

55. I used to work for NORAD back around

1960, in the war planning department, but only as a secretary. I did many reports on the results of nuclear bomb blasts, and I'm shaking in my shoes thinking they'd even consider such a thing as a preemptive nuclear strike. Another thing, the Chinese ain't gonna like it either as they're downwind from Iran. There are a few "stan" countries that would be even more upset.

[PublicWrath]

58. I used to think his religious bent was just superficial and a pose.

However, an awful lot of people who have known him up close and personal have commented on it and found it very disturbing.

I'm being to think he really does have a religious delusion. That's what scares me the most, too.

[tatertop]

28. Deep in your heart you know he's going to do it

Just a matter of when

[Atman]

32. Deep in my heart I know he is prepared to bomb the shit out of Iran

But not to nuke them. It makes no sense, even for Bush, because they gain nothing. There is always something in it for Bush. A pipeline, a new military base. There is NOTHING to be gained by using NUKES.

[tatertop]

35. He will do it because he wants to

He wants to throw fear and dread into the heart of every country.
He will do it because he cannot help
himself. There is no logic in the argument of a mad man.

[danalytical]

39. Too caught up in the nuke part

They are talking about bunker buster nukes on Iran's nuclear facilities. Not nuking the population. It would be easier to take out the facilities with a few bunker buster nukes than it would be to repeatedly bomb with conventional weapons. Also, I think they probably figure since we spent all this time and money developing these new weapons, why wouldn't we use them?

They plan on bombing the nuke sites, and igniting a revolution through humiliating Iran's clerical leadership. The nukes are simply the means to an end.

[Atman]

45. Did you read Hersch's article?

They expect to "light up Iraq like a candle."

That isn't a bunker buster. That's a bombing campaign.

One thing those who are flaming me on this thread are missing is stated in the orignal subject line...

I think it is 90% bullshit.

90% not 100%. Which means, sure, I'm open to the possibility that Bush is in fact crazy enough. So please, I wish those who feel the need to call me "Pollyanna" would focus on that. I'm not saying Bush WON'T do it. I'm saying I think it is highly unlikely the use of REAL nukes is anything more than saber-rattling.

Why are they building 40 military bases over there if they expect to toast the whole region? Doesn't make sense.

[danalytical]

56. I've only read the summary

I don't think they were referring to nuking southern Iraq, they were referring to the violence that will erupt if we attacked Iran.

This is how it reads in the summary I read.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002314390

The adviser warned that bombing Iran could provoke "a chain reaction" of attacks on American facilities and citizens throughout the world and might also reignite Hezbollah:
"If we go, the southern half of Iraq will light up like a candle."

[Canuckistanian]

31. These jerks folow through on their threats

No matter how boneheaded the statement in the first place. That's why other boneheads love them so much.

There were many who thought that the threats against Iraq were only saber-rattling, too.

[shenmue]

40. He's threatened this before...

and didn't get to it. But I wouldn't put it past him to try, as a last-ditch effort before he has to leave.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

43. It could be that they are "floating the balloon" to gauge public reaction.

If it's uneasy indifference, maybe they'll go ahead.

If it's millions of outraged people in the streets, they'll back off and pretend they were never thinking about this.

Just a thought...

[nadinbrzezinski]

44. And I hope that is the real scenario here

but I do not discount them using nukes

[PublicWrath]

59. You beat me to it.

They are testing America's stomach for it. How about some pre-emptive war protests?

[KoKo]

47. Good points...and it gave me a chuckle....

I have your view...and also pray that this is more bluff and not another insane move by them.

[Cerridwen]

48. Could he/they be trying to provoke an attack?

See, we didn't start it - but we'll damn well finish it justification?

I just can't get my mind to think like them. I'd be afraid I'd lose it and never be "normal" again.

[alfredo]

49. Can you say Messianic?

[Rocknrule]

51. Where on God's green earth did you find that picture???

Please tell me it's satire
:scared:

[alfredo]

54. It's satire

I did it.

[stepnw1f]

50. I Agree

It's a distraction.

I do however see this hurting Bush more than helping him. Rove is a trick pony. Genuis my ass he is.

[cynatnite]

53. I'm not as confident as you...

Speaking of President Bush, the House member said, “The most worrisome thing is that this guy has a messianic vision.”

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact

[Atman]

57. This B61-11 is NOT a "tactical" weapon

This is a cross-post from the Seymour Hersch thread, but it probably belongs here more.

This weapon we are talking about will rain hell down on our "allies" and friends in Europe, Asia, the United States, all over our own troops. It just doesn't make sense to use it. Not a lick of sense. I know, the argument is that Bush has no sense, but they have to expect to GAIN something by detonating it.

Could someone PLEASE explain to me what they think Bush believe he'll gain? I don't buy the "ascending to heaven" stuff. That's crap. They are spending billions on new military bases, pipelines, stealing the treasury blind...for what? To ascend to heaven with them? IT MAKES NO SENSE.

==

Detonating a "fission-fusion-fission" warhead 10 - 20 feet underground will make a *huge* mess. I am not even sure how to put the scale of the fallout into words.

Even if they turn off the H-bomb section and just use it as a 10kt A-bomb, the level of fallout will still be unprecedented.

Even if they just make it do a 0.3kt fizzle, it'll probably be the worst fallout incident in history.

.