Truer words were never so true.
US ready to strike Iran by spring
- Thread starter madanthonywayne
- Start date
And that's the truest truth you can get. Truly.Truer words were never so true.
Indubitably.
HAha, don't worry he'll make something up that will make the US public back him, it should be easy enough with most of the media supporting him.
The Middle East is already trashed because the united shithole decided to remove the major force keeping Iran in check. When the US left there will be a civil war and Iran will back the Shi'ites after which some other country decides to back the sunni...
The Middle East is already trashed because the united shithole decided to remove the major force keeping Iran in check. When the US left there will be a civil war and Iran will back the Shi'ites after which some other country decides to back the sunni...
Apparently the Executive Branch is pushing for escalation, even preparing the battlefield for a new front in the war. Meanwhile, the Pentagon is apparently pushing back, and resisting the anonymous agitating by "government sources". It seems like the Bush cabal is running out of clout, even as they become more desperate to escalate, and roll the big dice again. It's a disorganized crap-shoot. Dangerous times.
But there's no such thing, especially in highly-charged and thoughtless buzzwords like that.
Ridiculous. Please don't troll here, Oniw17.
A new bogeyman is being showcased by President Bush in his news conference today (click on the 2/14/07 Bush News Conference in the Javascript links to watch):
Get ready to hear a lot from the President and his spin-machine about the Qods Force.
Get ready to hear a lot from the President and his spin-machine about the Qods Force.
Hmmm...
He doesn't even call them koodz but cuddz. Ugh.
shot by a sniPer, will be an awesome resolution.
spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
The most truthful thing I heard Bush say today is:
"Money trumps peace".
"Money trumps peace".
To quote Bush at todays new's conference ' I'm going to do something about it'. In Bush language, that means 'IRAN, I'm going to bomb The Hell out of ya and I don't care if you are supplying Iraq insurgents with weopons or not'.
Need I say more?
Juan Cole's educated guess is that Moqtada is in hiding in Iraq.
I'm wondering how long Moqtada can passively endure such high-stakes provocation from Washington in depicting the Cleric's disappearance as a chicken-run. In effect, Bush is calling the Mahdi Army out. This carefully-spun cry of "Bring 'em on" has tremendous potential for disruption and blowback, however calculated it may be for deniability back in the USA.
I'm wondering how long Moqtada can passively endure such high-stakes provocation from Washington in depicting the Cleric's disappearance as a chicken-run. In effect, Bush is calling the Mahdi Army out. This carefully-spun cry of "Bring 'em on" has tremendous potential for disruption and blowback, however calculated it may be for deniability back in the USA.
Professor Cole is continuing to quote sources alleging that Moqtada is still in Iraq, even amid other anectodes that his militia have been melting away/making "pilgrimages" to Iran as the new American offensive gathers.
A link at juancole.com also points to an IPS article debunking recent Bush Administration talking points and posturing. Gareth Porter reminds us that Iranian arms exports routinely travel through other-than-official distribution; that Iranian-mfd arms are not unusual throughout the Mideast; that Iraqi government and security agencies are by no means innocent in terms of arms trafficking; and (which I have also suspected) that the EFP's present no technology that Iraqis are not entirely capable of manufacturing locally with simple machine tools.
Especially in Iraq, where high explosives are so uncommonly accessible, home-brew seems like the most convenient and secure means for insurgents to exploit IED and EFP assymetrical-warfare breakthroughs- cheap devices that trash multi-million-dollar armor, often without exposing the operators to direct retaliation; cheap devices that so viciously take the lives and limbs of our precious soldiers; vicious little cans that are nothing less than revolutionary in modern warfare; gadgets that Iraqis could conceivably (and relatively easily) continue making while America's economy strains to maintain 20th-Century conventions in war production. IEDs and EFPs are an effective force-multiplier and investment-multiplier for insurgents, and a serious challenge to overextended superpowers. In short they could be the Iraq War equivalent to the Stingers Reagan so decisively provided the Taliban in their resounding defeat of the Soviets. I'm afraid that if the American public pays scant attention to most developments until US casualties precipitously mount, then the opposition naturally will become extremely capable of clearly communicating to them in this horrible way.
I think it's safe to say that IEDs, EFPs, and shoulder-launched SAMs (also notably on the increase in action lately) seriously annoy Dubya, however insensitive he may be to what war is like. It also seems as if the Bush cabinet had prepared (in response to these serious threats) a whole bill of goods implicating and even scapegoating the Iranian government in the deadly and costly Iraq quagmire, but the presentation was much delayed and watered-down because the US intelligence community balked at signing off on the claims the Bush cabinet wanted sold.
If the Bushmen really want a new Iranian Front in the War on Terra, they may have to resort to a Gulf of Tonkin re-enactment, which would be a gigantic gamble in may ways. There is diminishing certainty over support for attacking Iran among the Joint Chiefs and Congress. So much of America is onto them, and the neocon strategists obviously know it. In the cautious dilution of the present blame-Tehran campaign, we can see that they are treading much more carefully now.
Which for all of our sakes, they had damn well better do.
A link at juancole.com also points to an IPS article debunking recent Bush Administration talking points and posturing. Gareth Porter reminds us that Iranian arms exports routinely travel through other-than-official distribution; that Iranian-mfd arms are not unusual throughout the Mideast; that Iraqi government and security agencies are by no means innocent in terms of arms trafficking; and (which I have also suspected) that the EFP's present no technology that Iraqis are not entirely capable of manufacturing locally with simple machine tools.
Especially in Iraq, where high explosives are so uncommonly accessible, home-brew seems like the most convenient and secure means for insurgents to exploit IED and EFP assymetrical-warfare breakthroughs- cheap devices that trash multi-million-dollar armor, often without exposing the operators to direct retaliation; cheap devices that so viciously take the lives and limbs of our precious soldiers; vicious little cans that are nothing less than revolutionary in modern warfare; gadgets that Iraqis could conceivably (and relatively easily) continue making while America's economy strains to maintain 20th-Century conventions in war production. IEDs and EFPs are an effective force-multiplier and investment-multiplier for insurgents, and a serious challenge to overextended superpowers. In short they could be the Iraq War equivalent to the Stingers Reagan so decisively provided the Taliban in their resounding defeat of the Soviets. I'm afraid that if the American public pays scant attention to most developments until US casualties precipitously mount, then the opposition naturally will become extremely capable of clearly communicating to them in this horrible way.
I think it's safe to say that IEDs, EFPs, and shoulder-launched SAMs (also notably on the increase in action lately) seriously annoy Dubya, however insensitive he may be to what war is like. It also seems as if the Bush cabinet had prepared (in response to these serious threats) a whole bill of goods implicating and even scapegoating the Iranian government in the deadly and costly Iraq quagmire, but the presentation was much delayed and watered-down because the US intelligence community balked at signing off on the claims the Bush cabinet wanted sold.
If the Bushmen really want a new Iranian Front in the War on Terra, they may have to resort to a Gulf of Tonkin re-enactment, which would be a gigantic gamble in may ways. There is diminishing certainty over support for attacking Iran among the Joint Chiefs and Congress. So much of America is onto them, and the neocon strategists obviously know it. In the cautious dilution of the present blame-Tehran campaign, we can see that they are treading much more carefully now.
Which for all of our sakes, they had damn well better do.
Last edited:
The intelligence people say there is no proof for Iran involvement. Let's say from a hypothetical perspective that there is.
Is there actually a reason why Iran isn't allowed to meddle in the affairs of Iraq?
Is there actually a reason why Iran isn't allowed to meddle in the affairs of Iraq?
Its so unAmerican of them?