As unpopular as the wars are how easy/hard would it be to gin up support for another one with Iran?

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.pollingreport.com/iran.htm

[mikelgb]

1. like buttah

[yurbud]

2. public opinion doesn't matter. they will pretend we're behind it and believe the lies

[yurbud]

3. the ugly truth is it would be unwise for Iran NOT to pursue nuclear weapons

A hostile foreign power with overwhelming military superiority has invaded the countries on either side of them and continually threatens to attack or invade them. How do you deter such an attack when the foreign power seems oblivious to the casualties that result from the inevitable guerrilla war that results from occupations?

[gratuitous]

4. Except . . .

Iraq didn't have nuclear weapons and North Korea did. Which country was invaded and is currently being occupied by our military?

[yurbud]

11. that proves not contradicts my point. Noam Chomsky said our government

knew Saddam didn't have nukes or they wouldn't have invaded.

The small chance that he would use them in response to an invasion was too much of a public relations risk (the folks in DC don't give a shit how many of us peons get killed as long as they can manipulate our reaction to it).

[gratuitous]

13. Whoops, I misread your subject line

I thought it said that it would be "wise," not "unwise" for Iran to pursue development of nuclear weapons. That should teach me to read more carefully, but I think we all know what the real outcome will likely be.

[Lance_Boyle]

5. Republicans in charge to do it?

The AIPAC lobby is strong in both parties, as is the MIC funding (although the latter is much stronger in R circles, the former is equally powerful in both parties). I don't think it would take much doing to get Joe Average all rah-rah to invade Iran. Certainly not any power shift in Congress or the White House.

[Ganja Ninja]

7. Exactly

I can't understand the reasoning that we have to hit Iran before Israel does. Let them do their own dirty work.

[KansDem]

6. Obama would have to lie about the reasons, like what W did for the Iraq war...

But, like W, he could always claim "intelligence failure" if his lie is revealed to be just that.

That would placate the media and conservatives...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Erect bogeyman, Wave flag, Send in the troops. Promise glorious victory. Works every time.

Followed by shouts of "Support the Troops" to keep it going when it's lost.
Followed by "Peace with Honor".
Followed by pretty monument to the dead.

Stand by pretty monument to announce new war against new bogeyman.

Rinse, repeat, etc.

[ThomThom]

9. have another fake terrorist bombing like 09-11-01

[T Wolf]

10. A - except that it will not take the rethugs in charge to start the next one. IT could

just as easily be a Democratic action, esp. if the rhetoric about Obama being anti-Israel heats up and he feels the need to move further right.

It is plainly obvious by now that both parties are war parties, servicing the MIC as much as they can get away with.

[Poll_Blind]

12. One name: Scott Speicher. n/t

PB

[Hekate]

14. One more reason NOT to allow Repubs back in charge, no matter the disappointment/disagreement...

... with the current administration expressed by so many here.

Just call me "Chuckles."

Hekate

[librechik]

15. they don't need "American's support." All they need is 12 bluedogs in Congress.

"Americans" have been stuck "supporting' unpopular wars for decades now. Profit for the MIC is all that's really necessary for the war to go on and on and on.

[EFerrari]

18. Is that the magic number? That's depressing. n/t

[dtexdem]

16. The answer categories aren't adequate.

No, I don't think it would be easy, or even possible, to gin up support.

But I don't think that would stop the U.S. from getting into such a war.

[joeybee12]

17. So fucking easy it makes me weep...n/t

[PufPuf23]

19. The recent WikiLeaks indicated that the Taliban was getting help

from Iran as well as Pakistan's ISI.

Makes one wonder sometimes.