I now fear that a war on Iran is not too far off.

[KlatooBNikto]

I base it on three facts:

1. Scott Ritter, a reliable guide, is saying that those operations have already started.

2. Condi Rice has warned India and Pakistan not to proceed with their natural gas pipeline project from Iran to India.

3. W's popularity ratings have tanked.


Expect the worst; W won't disappoint you.

[Inland]

1. Just because it's an idiotic idea

doesn't mean it won't happen.

If this is like Iraq, there will be a year of lies to swing public opinion that way.

Seen any sign of the drumbeat?

[Teaser]

2. But how is it possible?

There are, literally, no troops that can be used for Iran. There aren't even enough for Iraq by itself.

So I can't see a full blown invasion. A bombing campaign? Absolutely possible. I even expect it. But I don't really expect an invasion/occupation.

[Inland]

3. A war is always possible, even if winning isn't.

Not everyone who starts a war, wins a war.

So it's an idiotic idea. So what?

[marmar]

5. Exactly...

If we tried to fight a war against Monaco right now, we'd be in trouble.

[KlatooBNikto]

6. It is going to be the old Afghan trick.Leave Iraq in chaos and start

chaos in Iran. Hit and run tactics will be used and a lot of airpower will be deployed.The bases in Iraq and Azerbaijan are meant for this operation as Ritter points out.Azeri soldiers have been trained for these operations by U.S. personnel.

[havocmom]

7. The neocons announce that Iraq is now fine and move everybody there east

Iraq as a staging location for all sorts of plans would be a safe guess.

[Teaser]

11. Using Iraq as a staging area would be a disaster

The entire Iranian military operation would be hobbled by Iraqi insurgent attacks on supply lines to the Iranian front. We would be bled to death, and ground up by the adequate (as compared to Iraq) Iranian military on the front lines.

No American military commander would permit launcing such an attack.

[havocmom]

16. No DECENT American military commander would permit the mess in Iraq either

and for the same reasons. Just the same, there we are.

[Teaser]

17. Here I disagree.

Because the tactical planning for the invasion of Iraq was sound. If the aim were only invasion, the plan would have been fine. Notwithstanding the illegitimate reasoning for the invasion or the lack of planning for the aftermath.

However, with an Iran invasion, drawing up an intelligent invasion scenario is not possible. Perhaps if Allawi and his cronies had managed to steal the election. But there is no way the Jaafari government in Iraq will permit such an abuse. And if an invasion occurs without their countenance, there will be a full scaled shi'ah revolt in Iraq that will make the asSadr rebellion look like tiddlywinks.

If asked to draw up plans for an Iran invasion, the army will mutiny. Indeed, there is already a mutiny under way...read this:

. . a feeling is growing among senior officers in Baghdad and Washington that it is only a matter of time before the Pentagon sets a timetable of its own for withdrawal. These officers point to the effect on American public opinion of the slow disintegration of the 30-nation military coalition that America leads, and to frustration on Capitol Hill with the faltering buildup of Iraqi forces. These officers also cite the recruiting slump and fear the risk is growing that the war, like Vietnam, will do lasting damage to the Army and the Marines.

link

This is mutinous talk. The military is basically saying that they will *not* implement a policy of long term occupation of Iraq, what the president says notwithstanding. If they are mutinying over Iraq, they will not invade Iran.

I suspect that the administration knows this, and will focus on a (foolish) attempt to destabilize via an air campaign coordinated with terrorist attacks by the Mujaheddin-e-Khalq (an Iranian anti-government militia). This attempt will fail, as the MeK are not a threat to Teheran.

[Vladimir]

22. I think your analysis is quite sound

I cannot see any way, short of a full draft, that the US could start a war with Iran at this point in time (or any point in the near future). And the question to ask is - whose interests would this serve? Domestically a draft would be disasterous, and the attack itself would be like asking the whole Middle East to unite against the USA (after all, what is the point in acquiescing if you are going to be picked off one by one?). It simply makes no sense.

[Sather Gate]

9. The Neocons who brought the world the disaster in Iraq

are going to be too busy defending themselves - in court and out - to fantasize another offensive. The uniformed military will not countenance it, and Booosh, the neocons, and the Christian fundies and Christian Zionists - the mainstays of this aggression - would risk a military coup. That is the path of Empire; the Praetorian Guard ends up overthrowing the boy Emperor and installing the next Caesar.
They made a wasteland and called it peace. -Tacitus

[KlatooBNikto]

10. The War on Iran will be the culmination of the PNAC wet dream that

wants to reproduce Israel's wars with just about everybody on a worldwide scale using American blood and money.They have had Iraq, Iran and Syria in their crosshairs.Syria looks like it will succumb without firing a shot.It is the other two that pose a challenge right now.

[Inland]

18. Just saying that another idiotic, come-back-to-bite-in-ass decision

isn't beyond these guys.

[Just Me]

4. Watch for the step up in war propaganda.

On the other hand, they may skip right over that step. Destabilization has already started. They may actually start the "shock and awe" before the propaganda campaign this time.

It's going to happen unless this neoCON cabal are indicted. It's going to happen. I surely do hope no one doubts that these people will go forward.

[MuseRider]

8. Of course they will

they do not benefit from peace.

They have begun. I figure if they can't provoke Iran into a blast at us they will blast a group of our soldiers themselves who are nearby (Azerbaijan?) and blame it on the Iranians, there you go. A really good reason for another war, one the people can get behind.

Peace will allow too many people to regroup and rethink and it allows too much time for questioning. They can't allow that to happen.

[FloridaPat]

12. THe plan I heard is Israel will bomb strategic sites and the places

where the leaders are. The US will back them up. That way it's really Israel doing the aggression. Then the people of Iran will come to the rescue - overthrow what's left of their government and start a new democracy. We can just move our troops a little to the east and hold both countries. And since all those insurgents are coming in from Iran, that would solve two problems at the same time. The Iraqi insurgency would be dead, the Iranians would be free and in their thankfullness, we would get oil for $25 a barrel and they would even sell the oil to our oil companies.

[KlatooBNikto]

20. I think a clue to why the Democrats are in bed with the Republicans

on this hegemonic wars is provided by Nancy Pelosi's statement that the War on Iraq was about Israel's survival, no less.They have come to the conclusion that the numerical advantage of the Arabs must be counterbalanced by American firepower and mobility.The destabilization of Iran, Iraq and Syria is part of the plan to neutralize the enemies of Israel in the immediate vicinity. And this is also why Lieberman and Friedman keep talking about the Iraq War as a just war. And this is also why we have the DLC not making any waves about the disenfranchisement of blacks or vote fraud.

Although I detest nader for what he did to our real President Al Gore in 2000, he was right that there is not a dime's worth of difference between the two parties as they stand.

The me too Republicans of the DLC may actually want the black and hispanic voters disenfranchised because their agenda is the same as that of the PNAC in the Middle East and may not sit well with the usual Democratic Constituents.Their spokesman Al From keep making statements about the electorate perceiving us as weak on national security.Yet, we have won close to 50% of the popular vote without even energizing our own base.Explain to me what would happen if we field candidates that would ensure that our traditional coalition would turn out in massive numbers and we ensure that their votes are cast and counted properly.

[paula777]

21. This scenario is much more likely than the US starting the aggression

[DefenseLawyer]

13. Notice there are now a few stories

about "border disputes" between Iraqis and Iranian troops making it into the news. I would expect some kind of Gulf of Tonkin incident on the border to justify the next war, because they know the "they're a threat" card isn't going to play this time.

[Redstone]

14. I'm not all that worried anymore.

The military brass is already at its wits' end dealing with Iraq (not to mention how the troops feel, expecially the National Guard). If the fuckwads order them into Iran, I think there's a real possibility of a mutiny.

I do agree that we're probably in for another round of bullshit & bluster, like we got about Syria a couple of years ago, but I don't think even THESE dipshits would be stupid enough to start anything, given the resistance they'd face from our military.

Redstone

[bicentennial_baby]

15. Future Newsflash: Bin Laden Thought to be in Iran

...or Syria, but probably Iran...

[laundry_queen]

19. This shit has already started.

A guest last week on The Daily Show said exactly that :Bin Laden is thought to be hiding in Iran.
:puke:

[TWiley]

23. Look at a map. We have Iran surrounded.

Afganistan to the east, Iraq to the west, Turkey is up north, and there are a buttload of ships in the Persian Gulf.

The Neo-cons will not let this opportunity pass.

[Just Me]

24. Joint exercises with Pakistan being reported in LBN.

The neoCONs will proceed and they will do whatever it takes to execute their plan.

[TWiley]

26. I am afraid that you are absolutely correct.

They will do the same as they did in Iraq.

[catmandu57]

25. The pnac have failed to adapt

they have failed to evolve, and contrary to all those who say otherwise I believe in adapting to and evolving in an evironment. The onac is living in a world that doesn't exist, and they won't change the game plan to suit the world that does exist.
Witness their plans for the invasion and occupation of Iraq, they went awry from day one.
The Iraqis didn't welcome us with open arms, flowers, chocolates, and virgins, we were successful in defeating a defanged army, but, are losing miserably the occupation.
The air force and navy haven't felt the bite of the Iraqi resistance and they may go along with some half assed idea of a war with Iran. The army and marines are a different story, while they haven't been chewed up and spit out, yet, they are feeling the depletion, and are nowhere ready to try the deep end of the pool just now.

The world situation has changed since the boys first conceived this wetdream, thanks to outsourcing China has became the big boy on the blockand unless people recognize it they are setting themselves up for catastrophe.

Russia is reserging as well, and new alignments have formed, China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and as a proxy Syria, attack one you've attacked all.

And, these countries don't have to respond militarily, China alone has so much of our debt they can put us in a world of hurt without firing a shot.

Now, are they crazy enough, sure, these people are shit house rat crazy, but, we'll be cutoff at the knees quick fast and in a big fucking hurry.