Are we really going to attack Iran?

[mahina]

If we DUers, sitting in our livingrooms, know that attacking Iran will shut off the straights of Hormuz and at least triple the price of oil, put our men and women in uniform in Iraq in line of fire from a very well armed nation with a well rested army, torpedo our economy even further and leave our country in deep and serious trouble orders of magnitude worse than the current mess,
how is it possible that the President does not know this?

That said, which of the following do you think is true? (For this conversation, "we" means Israel and/or the US. Iran understands that an attack by Israel is an attack by the US.)

[Imagevision]

1. Cheney: Israel may attack iran, the US. will of course back up Israel...

[heidler1]

10. Backing up Israel if they are attacked is one thing, but if Israel does the attacking it's diff.

Could we be that stupid? I hope not,

[KansDem]

2. They'd be INSANE to attack Iran!!!

oops...did I say that? :blush:

[ladjf]

22. Well, they are bat shit crazy. So I wouldn't depend on sanity from that group.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. Yes, yes we will and like last time I can scream et al

but Straussians cannot and will not be stopped

Not at least until we are willing to do some things that muricans are not willing to

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. Yes they want to do it

And it is up to us to stop it.

I honestly believe the only reason they haven't attacked Iran is the pressure from constituents to their congress critters.

As the election nears, if it looks like Obama will win, you bet they will attack Iran. They will want to leave a mess for him to clean up, it's an American tradition. :)

[PerfectSage]

5. If Cheney has his way, it'll happen. I don't think Cheney's gonna get his way.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JF24Ak04.html

[bamacrat]

6. If he did with out Congress' approval...

he would either be arrested and charged with war crimes after he was unanimously impeached and the American public would rise up to demand justce. I hope.

[bananas]

12. He already has Congress' approval

Haven't you been paying attention?

[bamacrat]

15. I think this is one issue this congress would show some balls on and oppose it.

hopefully

[spanone]

16. congress will stand on the steps and sing 'god bless america'....they will stand behind their leader

'in a time of war'

[hfojvt]

7. What did I do when faced with danger?

Iran

How long have some DUers been talking about the imminent and inevitable war with Iran? I am thinking it goes back to 2004.

WOLF!!!1!

[Disturbed]

8. Maybe all of the threats are a ploy to bankrupt Iran?

Iran is spending a whole lot on their Military Defense. Their economy is shaky.

[newmajority]

13. Well in case you hadn't noticed

They're fucking OUR economy a lot worse than they are Iran's. :(

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. Do it by proxy. Israel leads, we follow to "support our ally".

Unfortunately, Eisenhower isn't around to avoid the trap like he did in the manufacture "Suez Crisis".

[Truth2Tell]

11. Other. Yes , they want to attack Iran.

But there still may be people who can stop it - it's just not us.

[rucky]

14. I suggest Biden starts making good on his promise to Bushco...

to IMPEACH if he attacks Iran.

There's gotta be a way to show them he'd have the votes, if it comes down to it.

[MrCoffee]

17. No way. Not without a draft, which is the very last thing * can afford.

[spanone]

18. Kristol: bu$h* Might Bomb Iran If He ‘Thinks Senator Obama’s Going To Win’»

On Fox News Sunday this morning, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol said that President Bush is more likely to attack Iran if he believes Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) is going to be elected.

However, “if the president thought John McCain was going to be the next president, he would think it more appropriate to let the next president make that decision than do it on his way out,” Kristol said, reinforcing the fact that McCain is offering a third Bush term on Iran.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/22/kristol-bush-iran/

[readmoreoften]

19. I picked the "yes we're going to attack" but I don't like the fatalism of "nothing we can do"

The reality is that there is nothing we WILL do about it. We could organize for a national strike. Perhaps only a few hundred people would participate and lose their jobs over nothing. Perhaps a few thousand would participate and lose their jobs creating a media "dire situation" and thereby accomplishing something. Perhaps that would lead to hundreds of thousands general striking the next time they try something.

We're not powerless; we're just not willing to risk what we have to save the lives of millions of people.

[mahina]

20. I agree with you completely. Too late to change the wording

but you nailed it. We do have many options for nonviolent resistance.

[ladjf]

21. Its impossible to guess what the maniacs who are now in charge of our

government will do next. Their past actions have defied logic.