John M… considering that it’s been everyone *but* Bush talking of striking Iran, what the heck makes you think believe all the fear propaganda being spread by everyone BUT the WH? Even this article makes it quite clear that any Israeli strike will not be backed up with US troops and availablility of US bases in Iraq.

DOH… that must mess up the DNC election fear campaign….

It’s all a political game play… make everyone fear Bush, and JSM as a possible GWB 3rd term. Yet the only ones I hear beating the drums for war with Iran are those that hate Bush, and the media (who also hate Bush).

You cannot equate Iraq with Iran. Different history in negotiations on the int’l front. Different threats from Saddam directly to the US. You had a nicely packed set of DNC talking points there, neatly packaged … but very little action and prep didn’t grow out of intelligence the WH and DOD had, that you and the media did not. Intelligence that has been confirmed by the Harmony and ISG documents.

Building up presence in the Persian Gulf was, and has always been, a wise move considering the situation post 911. And deployments in Dec 2002 was merely a few months in advance of the OIF. Your protests of Iraq, and your ardent belief that Bush will attack Iran in time to hand the reins to someone else, truly make no sense whatsoever.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

a Any idea what will happen to our troops in Iraq if Israel goes to war with Iran? Dave N.

Any Idea what will happen to the Middle East if Iran gets the bomb?

I mean it’s not like they are poor misunderstood innocents.

UPDATE:
This is, for them, a religious war, and even to the point of suicide, that is how much they hate us. If they get an nuke, they will search and search until they find a way to use it. They must be stopped.

And with Israel barely a stone’s throw away, Jews cannot afford to wait. The Muslim leaders are all raving anti-Semites, and are constantly proving they cannot be trusted to keep any agreement they make, except the agreement among themselves to perpetually attack Americans and Jews. Wake up, before it’s too late.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dave Noble, I believe the point of Scott’s article is that it would be Israel who attacked Iran, not the US. Also, a paragraph from the linked article that’s important for you:

“Amber means get on with your preparations, stand by for immediate attack and tell us when you’re ready,” the official said. But the Israelis have also been told that they can expect no help from American forces and will not be able to use US military bases in Iraq for logistical support.

The US can not tell Israel what to do INRE their own defense decisions. But what the US can do is reiterate our support for Israel, constantly under attack both verbally and with rockets, from the leadership of Iran and it’s funded puppets.

The fact that the US would stand behind Israel may be enough to deter Iran, who no doubt feels quite confident they could battle Israel one on one and walk away a victor. Add the US to the mix, and I doubt that confidence remains.

While I agree there are repercussions of anyone tackling Iran militarily, we can only deal with the results if Israel chooses that route. Certainly with the possibility of a negotiating fool/Obama presidency, they may feel that time is not on their side.

But again, I believe that with Israel’s negotiations with both Hamas and Syria, and under the unpopular Olmert, I’m just not getting the gut feeling that Israel will launch anything, anytime soon. Could be wrong, tho.

BTW, INRE your “drilling in ANWR” side tact…. as Yonason said, John Ryan brought up the price of oil in response to this post. However it was less a “drill” issue than merely another “hate/blame Bush” issue.

And the oil supply side issue was never limited to ANWR in any comment. So technically, it hijacked to a hate Bush because of oil prices, and never to anything about drilling in ANWR.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Dave,
“Any idea what will happen to the price of oil if Iran closes the Straits of Hormuz?”
I expect oil will go up, the strategic reserves will be released, but Israel’s gonna do what Israel’s gonna do-amber light or green light or even red light (as was the case prior to Osirik)

“Any idea what will happen to our troops in Iraq if Israel goes to war with Iran?”
Yep, Iran will send arms to attack them, back militias in Iraq, and directly attack them, but American troops are of vastly superior quality and veterans, and they’re backed by the Iraqis now who (in Basra, Fallujah, and Sadr City) have succeeded in quelching terror on their own or w minimal help.

“This isn’t the Jets and the Sharks in West Side Story.”
I know. I agree. Recall that I’m not calling you a loonbat or anything. I’m asking you to further elaborate on your comment, “I think we should more concerned about acquainting ourselves with the realities of Iran’s foreign policy initiatives, and intelligently determining our most reasonable course of action.”

Personally, I think that everything’s been tried and failed. Sen Obama and others like to tel us we should personally sit down w Iran and talk to them directly (as if somehow they haven’t gotten the message when presented in public, presented at the UN, presented in talks in Baghdad, and presented by our allies for us). Me, I don’t quite understand how that works. I mean, if I WERE PRESIDENT, I’d fly to Tehran and talk to them, and if they refused to end their nuclear bomb program, I’d leave, and help out Israel. However, the only thing to be gained (imo) by talking directly talking to Iran is that it would present a faux image that the US had tried everything. Even Bayh was on tv this week, and he said it right….it probably won’t work, but it’s a check on the checklist of things to do before bombing. What’s checking off that little box do? It’s supposed to convince anti-war folks, appeasers, pacifists, etc that war’s the last option. Since we all know Ahmadinejad’s not just gonna cave in or agree to any deal already presented, then I see it as a moot effort, and since those people I just mentioned will NEVER be convinced that attacking before being nuked is a rational idea…welp, again…why bother?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Scott,

It must be wonderful to be able to decide so simply what needs to be done. Any idea what will happen to the price of oil if Iran closes the Straits of Hormuz? Any idea what will happen to our troops in Iraq if Israel goes to war with Iran? This isn’t the Jets and the Sharks in West Side Story.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

deleted by author

no futher comments till stupid pills wear off

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Yeah that John Dean is such a reliable source. You mean the guy who actually ordered Water Gate, and then threw every one under the bus. frankly I don’t give a damn what John Dean has to say, it’s all bull shiite anyway.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

John M,

Good to see your post. I’m waiting for the response. I’m not sure how we went from bombing Iran to drilling in ANWR, but hopefully this thread will get back on track.

Ready for Armaggedon, folks? I’m not. God help us.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Actually John, the article said specifically that Pres Bush had not given a “green light” for an attack by Israel, and is specifically said the US would not strike during the Bush Admin.

Did you read the article you’re commenting on?

Also, what’d you mean by, “I think we should more concerned about acquainting ourselves with the realities of Iran’s foreign policy initiatives, and intelligently determining our most reasonable course of action.”

Iran’s making nuclear bombs
Iran’s threatened Israel
Israel might as well attack now rather than wait to be attacked
Iran’s promised to attack the US if it’s attacked by Israel
Iran has more terrorists than conventional forces so…
any attack from Iran is more likely to be by terrorists than conventional forces.

British diplomacy failed
French diplomacy failed
Russian diplomacy failed
EU diplomacy failed
UN diplomacy failed
US diplomacy has failed since Carter cut off ties in 1979

What realities are you thinking of?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Experts have been predicting that Bush would authorize a strike on Iran for years:

“I believe President Bush is going to order air strikes (on Iran) before he leaves office”
-Norman Podhoretz (Lyons, 2007).

Bush and his cronies say they want peace and diplomacy, but the problem with the members of Bush administration is that you can’t trust them. You can’t take what they at face value.

As former Nixon aide John W. Dean wrote, “George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney have created the most secretive presidency of my lifetime. Their secrecy is far worse than during Watergate.”

The administration secretly planned and prepared for war with Iraq without disclosing it to the general public. Planning began in November of 2001 and included upgrading airfields in various Gulf countries, moving supplies to the region and the construction of necessary facilities.

By April 2002, the planning and preparation for war was also being hidden from Congress. Bush had instructed General Tommy Franks not to make financial requests through Washington. “Anything you need, you’ll have.”

The money would no longer be appropriated through congress. By the end of July 2002, Bush had approved more than thirty projects totaling over $700 million. Congress had no knowledge or involvement.

In December of 2002, Bush and Rumsfeld agreed to start secretly deploying troops into the theatre so as not to attract the attention of the press or the rest of the world.

The first deployment order went out on December 6, 2002 and deployments continued every two weeks or so thereafter. Troops were given less than a week’s notice at times.

In January 2003, the Bush administration arranged for much of its humanitarian relief to be disguised as general contributions to conceal its war planning from the NGO recipients.

Yet, when asked about Iraq, Bush’s favorite response was “I have no war plans on my desk.” At one point or another after the planning began, nearly every member of the administration publicly denied any plans to go to war with Iraq.

The question remains: Why would we expect the Bush administration to start being honest and up front about its intentions now?

A better approach to Iran would be negotiations. We need to give Iran an honorable path of retreat. While Fareed Zakaria agrees that there is no reason not to use sanctions and embargoes against states such as Iran, he suggests that we also need to “allow a viable way out.” That is to say, we need to negotiate and not merely mandate.

I think we should more concerned about acquainting ourselves with the realities of Iran’s foreign policy initiatives, and intelligently determining our most reasonable course of action.

Like or Dislike: 0  0