Is bushco trying to provoke Iran into attacking the US so they can declare

[radwriter0555]

martial law and suspend the elections?

This might be the puzzle piece...

[LEW]

1. I don't know but..........................

Iran has been mentioned alot on all the talk shows. Makes me wonder (worry) something is going on......

[TexasSissy]

2. I thought * had his heart set on Syria for the next war.

[Kid_A]

3. I think provoking an attack is the only way * could get another war.

Enough people learned their lesson after the bullshit they were fed about Iraq than to support another preemptive strike. But if they were to hit us first, then that would be another story.

But why would they declare martial law after an attack? They didn't after 9/11, so what makes you think they would next time? Granted, they are getting sloppier and more desperate, but people would see right through a move like that.

[daa]

4. Bush has a problem

there is no one left to die for his lying ass. Weak military is now a liability.

[MallRat]

5. There's no one left to FIGHT an Iran war.

You can't just move 100,000 troops from policing Iraq to active combat in Iran overnight.

The lag-time between drafting 100,000 men and actually having them ready to right is too long.

If, heaven forbid, we actually had to fight a GENUINELY NECESSARY WAR, we'd have to do it without anyone on the ground: Air Force and Navy only. And we know that's just not possible- eventually, the time comes when you HAVE to have troops on the ground.

-MR

[lanparty]

6. The '42 elections weren't cancelled ...

And were were in the middle of the greatest war America has EVER faced. No war would cause cancellation of elections.

It would have to be some mayhem and chaos like a nuclear strike to prompt cancellations of elections.

[denverbill]

7. There is NO way Iran will attack. None.

They might be fanatical, but they aren't complete idiots.

They've seen what we did to Saddam's army. Their army is no better than Saddam's. They know we have nukes and a nut in charge.

OTOH, I would not put it past Bush to pull a September, 1939, and stage an attack by Iran on the US or Iraq, and use that to justify an invasion.

[sendero]

8. Exactly...

... and martial law is not going to happen, despite the numerous scenarios that pop up here every week.

Even the right will not stand still for that crap.

[alejandrofromcuba]

9. ME

no. we are not planning to openly have war with them.

We are helping (covertly) the opposition in Iran. Trust me--I have many friends throughout the middle east. It is an open secret. I don't think we will come home from the region until Iran's fundie government has been overthrown from within.

People are split on Syria--do we do it ourselves--or turn a blind eye while Isreal does the job and takes the heat for us? I am not sure which way it will go--but I do think Syria will be thumped down on pretty soon.

[denverbill]

10. That's not even an open secret. It's just open.

I don't think there is anybody in Iran that doesn't think the US is trying to topple Iran's government covertly.

The problem is, that any covert or overt effort by the US to destabilize or topple the Mullahs makes the entire opposition effort liable to be charged with treason. The mullahs don't hesitate to jail anyone who opposes them, or to accuse them, fairly or not, of being US puppets.

[theboss]

13. I know some people too; Iran can be toppled from within

The biggest open secret in Washington is that Iran's government is facing incredible demographic pressures from within and could be toppled at any time. And what will replace it will be far friendlier to the US. It's really only a matter of time at this point. Even the White House seems to grasp that a move from the outside would be far more damaging than allowing events to flow naturally.

[VolcanoJen]

11. Yep. We don't attack baby nuclear powers, no matter how...

... much more threatening they appear to be to America, in comparison with Iraq.

I agree with the September '39 thingie, though... I'd be shocked, but not surprised... does that make sense?

[theboss]

12. Why would a war with Iran cause Martial Law?

First of all, Iran can't reach our borders so there goes that reason. Secondly, a war with Iran would probably be over within 8 months at the most. (It would be longer than what happened in Iraq because it does have a sizable Army and Air Force to destroy by air power first and that would likely take several months).

Anyway, the mullahs in Iran are not stupid. Iran is just as close to revolution as Saudi Arabia and at the first sign of weakness, the young would overthrow that regime. It is a very different place from Iraq.