BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Barry Finn
Date: 08 Oct 07 - 06:13 PM

I've asked several canadates in the last election when on the trail about this & never had anyone address my question. The question was like poison.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: GUEST,nutter Bush
Date: 09 Oct 07 - 05:24 AM

George Bush and his voters and memeber's of his party are all war mongers, anlong side the Labour party here in britian

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Oct 07 - 02:20 PM

We had already reached that conclusion guest, with respect to Gorgeous George, but there are many members of the Republican Party who are neither nutters, nor warmongers. The same is true of the UK New Labour Party.

Both of these organisations are democratic in their policy decisions, and majority rule applies there as in elections.

So, you may claim that more than 50% of members of both organisations are nutters and warmongers, and I will agree.

Any higher claim will only serve to highlight the degree of nuttery in you own makeup.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: fumblefingers
Date: 09 Oct 07 - 11:56 PM

What are you Bush and Cheney haters going to work yourselves into a lather about when none of these dire things you predict happen?

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Stu
Date: 10 Oct 07 - 04:40 AM

"What are you Bush and Cheney haters going to work yourselves into a lather about when none of these dire things you predict happen?"

Because before your buddies kicked this whole misjudged episode off many people predicted this mess would happen, and it did happen - the war in Iraq that was based on lies and corporate profit, the laughable idea that somehow Saddam had anything to do with 9/11 and the astonishing fact monkey boy and his shooting partner had no contingency in place to cope with the inevitable insurgency (unless you include Halliburton coining it in on the back of a nation's misery).

The fact Bush let Al Quaeda into a country where it wasn't before, the torture and abuse of human rights in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, the utter desertion of morality and basic humand decency demonstrated by the kidnap ('rendition') and torture of people by the CIA in defiance of the due process of law . . . etc etc

What is truly amazing is the Bush and Cheny apologists still live in their bubble of ignorance and deluded self-interest.

Dead Amercian soldiers. Dead Iraqi civilians. Moral Corruption. The total abandonment of any sense of humilty and decency. A belligerent USA in the Middle East. Un-effing-believable.

Happy now?

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Wolfgang
Date: 10 Oct 07 - 07:02 AM

282RA,
if your last post is an indication of what you think is a good discussion I'd rather have a reasonable one.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: bankley
Date: 10 Oct 07 - 08:51 AM

Bush should invade Iran, preferrably alone, riding his mountain bike while wearing that "Jumpin' Jack Flash- mission accomplished" fly-boy suit with some pretzels sewn into the lining.... so that he won't be captured alive......

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: M.Ted
Date: 10 Oct 07 - 10:35 AM

Following this thread is a lot like watching "The Oxbow Incident"--especially after 282RA's "We can't use logic here, people" comment. I trust Bush's judgement more than that of some of the people on this thread. And that's not a compliment to Bush--

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: van lingle
Date: 10 Oct 07 - 03:12 PM

I like the way you think, bankley.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Oct 07 - 08:02 PM

LOL, bankley... Make that, "lots of pretzels"...

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Ron Davies
Date: 10 Oct 07 - 10:04 PM

bankley, that is a true stroke of genius--and something everybody on this thread, regardless of other differences of opinion, can applaud. And it wouldn't even need Congressional approval--I'll bet the whole Congress would give its blessing. Just be sure to video Bush's solo invasion. (And make the bike a tandem--with Cheney on the back). Then of course the question will be whether you're a public-spirited individual or a capitalist. If you're not a capitalist you'd put the video on You-Tube---where it will be an huge international smash hit. But you could make a LOT by selling it.

And by his invasion, Bush would be proving-- for the first time in his life-- that he was a good leader--since a good leader never asks his subordinates to do something he wouldn't be willing to do.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Peace
Date: 10 Oct 07 - 10:05 PM

"Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading..."


Has this become a Zen thread yet?

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: robomatic
Date: 10 Oct 07 - 10:38 PM

As for the original question, it seems to be clear that the US does not have the men and materiel to mount an invasion.

The nation of Iran is quite large and rich, full of young people who quite openly long for modernity, but under the thumb of reactionary mullahs and irresponsible leaders such as Ahmedinajab. It has been the tactic of some of these leaders to foment a fear of America, and Israel, so as to unify the population, much the same tactic as Hitler utilized in post WWI Germany.

In the meantime, the regime which holds sway by means of Mullah administered fitness judgements instead of democratic means, has persecuted religious minorities, homosexuals, and mishandled the economy even worse than the leaders of the United States.

I think the US administration is mostly aware of this, and mostly able to suspend kneejerk reactions to the kind of baiting that has come out of the sorry leadership of Iran: statements that the Holocaust did not happen, that the Jews of Israel should be relocated to Europe, (kind of ignoring all the Jews who were thrown out of their Middle Eastern homes), and of course, the Holocaust Cartoon Competition.

Even the dimmest of dim bulbs, saving only a few who've chosen to appear in this thread, are aware of this.


Iran's population is ripe for the modern age.
Iran has plenty of reason to go secular if left to its own devices.
Iran is not Arab.

So calm yourselves down and go rent a DVD of "300"

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Oct 07 - 07:30 PM

Okay, Robo...

This was brought out earlier and I rephrase the question changin' the word "invade" to "bomb"...

Different story here... Of course everyone knows that the US military is stretched too thin in ground troops but has lots of missles and bombers...

Word on the street that Bush and Co. have been having serious discussions about one more "shock and awe" before they leave... Bush has abosolutely nothing to loose in terms of his legacy... Thta is allready shot... So what's to prevent him from using Iranian intervention in Iraq as an excuse to "bomb" Iran without Cogressional approval???

The White House hasm afetrall, changed it's story in the last few weeks on Iran from "Iran is trying to build a nuke", which would require Congressional authority for any attack, to "Iran is helping the terrorists in Iraq", which Bush could say, "Hey, we're just doing what Congress alrerady said we could do..."

What am I missing here???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: robomatic
Date: 11 Oct 07 - 07:58 PM

Bobert:

I think you bring out some good points, and you are not missing much. I think Iran probably is helping our adversaries in Iraq, but what we can do about it is kinda hard to figure. I doubt if the leaders of Iran are totally in control of the kind of aid hard driving Shiites might render to their religious kindred. The kind of aid that kills Americans and Sunnis alike.

In short, it's complicated and short term actions have long term consequences.

I still do not see the US bombing Iran without extreme selectivity as in, targetting known and identified individuals that the US has 'the book' on. The US did that in Yemen with a remotely piloted vehicle, and I'm not aware of repercussions, but it was like I said, selected, targetted, and I don't think there were even any noncombatants involved (no bystanders) in the case of Yemen.

So I think there's a possibility the US could do something like that, and no possibility the US will invade Iran.

Right now the story seems to be whether the Turks will invade Iraq. There's nothing like a potential conflict between NATO members, eh?

I was not a fan of the "Shock and Awe" monicker and I don't see the Bush Administration laying down a lot of smoke'n drama that would penalize the next American administration. Bush is a lame duck war Prez and initiating showy "Sturm und Drang" moves at this stage will not burnish the ex-Presidential halo.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Oct 07 - 08:12 PM

Yeah, Robo...

When I heard about the Turks kickin' up a little dust on tonight's news I was thinkin', "Whew, this is great... This oughtta get Bush's tiny little attention span away from planning a bombing attack on Iran to cover his rear flank..." That's exactly what I thought... I'd rather have him involved in using some diplomacy to smooth relations with Turkey... This oughtta keep him well occupied...

I think that Bush gets bored easilly and that is why I have been concerned that he was getting ready to bomb Iran...

BTW, the Yeaman bombing was of a car/van on an almost deserted road... Iran presents a much more difficult target... Most folks who are in the know feel that any nuclear facilities are so deep that it would take a nuclear bunker buster to have half a chance to mess up... Those nuclear bunker busters ain't like, ahhhh, too sergical in nature... That had/has me concerned...

Thank you, Turkey... Tie the boy up for the next year an maybe, jus maybe, the world will dodge another Bush war of choice...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Ron Davies
Date: 11 Oct 07 - 09:35 PM

The Iranians are already being accused of interfering in Iraqi affairs. They will be only too happy to be given a wonderful excuse to come across the border--and look at the length of the border.

There is no such thing as a "surgical strike" on the nuclear facilities. Not only are they, as you note, Bobert, underground, but they are also scattered. Even "selected, targeted" attacks will do nothing but stir up the Iranian hornets' nest--and very likely result in Iranian attacks over the border. Iran after all has a large army--and it's right there--and primed to attack the forces of the Great Satan. And Shiites in Iraq--for instance, Sadr, will be only too happy to join the attack on the infidel Americans--so, as I said earlier, the likelihood would be a surge in US body bags--and no question who precipitated it. Next stop for Bush: impeachment--and likely conviction.   Not something he wants to take a chance on--even if this outcome is not etched in stone.

And while Bush is a despicable excuse for a leader, and for my money--as I've said before-- the worst president in US history, he is in fact not mentally unstable--and is capable of rational calculation--especially when politics is involved. Such as possible impeachment.   



Regarding Turkey: it seems it will be a raid or series of raids into "Kurdistan". After all, the PKK has already caused in Turkey something proportionate to US Vietnam deaths. No Turkish government can ignore this. And of course the bill on Armenian genocide does not help US-Turkey relations.

So what may happen, in addition to the raids, is complications for the US bringing supplies to troops in Iraq, many of which, I understand, come through Turkey.



One more thing: "sorry leadership of Iran: statements that the Holocaust did not happen"...

Not exactly. Some parts of Iran's leadership deny the Holocaust, some don't.

Indicative of this is the fact that ,as I've noted in another thread, a docudrama series on Iranian TV, loosely based on fact, about how an Iranian diplomat had saved many Jews during the Holocaust, was a huge hit--this year.

What the Iranian regime is trying to do is to draw a contrast between the Holocaust and Israel's current government. And they are having great success in doing this.

I hear you ask: "Does Iran expect Israel not to defend itself?" Good question. My only point is that the Iranian regime is pointing out the difference between the 1940's and now--as part of the campaign to portray Israel as the bully of the Mideast.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: GUEST,redhorse at work
Date: 12 Oct 07 - 02:58 AM

I doubt the presence of innocent neighbours will cause Bush much worry. He'll go ahead and bomb and then say it's all the Iranian's fault for siting US targets too near civilians.

nick

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Ron Davies
Date: 12 Oct 07 - 08:12 PM

I think you've missed the point, Nick. I don't believe anybody is alleging Bush is concerned
about civilian deaths. That would be a foolhardy assertion. However, he is concerned about impeachment--and has reason to be so. In response to a US attack on Iran, an offensive across the Iraq border by Iranians, posssibly joined by Iraqi Shiites--Sadr for instance-- and resulting in a huge surge of US body bags-- would be a likely result--and would also likely result in Bush's impeachment. At minimum it would probably result in the toppling of Maliki's government--for being too close to the US.

That's why an US attack on Iran is unlikely.

But, of course, we'll see.

And, despite the absurdly defeatist attitude of some Mudcatters, this Congress will never give Bush a declaration of war to attack Iran--and will seek impeachment--and probably get it--if he attacks without Congressional permission--especially with the--likely-- Iranian response I've outlined.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Wolfgang
Date: 16 Oct 07 - 01:03 PM

Many in the US Military Think Bush and Cheney Are Out of Control (DER SPIEGEL interview with military historian Kolko)

Most of the interview is about Iran. Kolko argues that neither the USA nor Israel will attack Iran.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 16 Oct 07 - 06:32 PM

More to the point, he can't even be stopped from illegally invading the privacy of US citizens.

Who is going to stop this shit for brains lunatic doing anything he wants.

Remember it takes just one bomb to start something the whole USA won't be able to stop.

And he directly controls the actions of the US military. That's the thing that needs changing, like Now!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Peace
Date: 16 Oct 07 - 06:34 PM

True. So what the hell is Congress doing? Tryin' to find a third way to cross their legs?

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Oct 07 - 06:26 PM

Naah, Bruce. They have to keep 'em uncrossed.

How else they gonna kiss their arse goodbye, when Georgie boy implodes?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: robomatic
Date: 17 Oct 07 - 07:08 PM

I think things will settle down. The US is extended to its military limits and has further limited itself by horrendously overexpending its currency and making some poor strategic and tactical decisions. I like Petraus in the position he's in, and wish to support him in the near and mid term.

George and Lon (I mean Dick) are lame ducks, and everyone on the political horizon is relatively sane.

I think it's time for the terrorists to make some mistakes, and hopefully continue to lose sway with their one-time followers.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Ron Davies
Date: 18 Oct 07 - 10:19 PM

"I like Petraus (sic) in the position he's in." Interesting. He himself probably doesn't like it. In charge of a "surge" which even Bush admits can't be sustained. Forced to witness how nothing he does brings the highly-touted and devoutly wished-for chimera "reconciliation" any closer. Of course it's a bit of a problem when part of Iraq--"Kurdistan" never wanted to be part of the country, and when the Shiites still fear the return of Baathism--so refuse to share power, and even refuse to accept the Sunnis being integrated into the army and police, according to the much ballyhooed "Anbar model". Now, to add to his joys, he has the "security providers" outside his purview, especially Blackwater, busily alienating Iraqis. And he'd best hope Bush doesn't invade or even bomb Iran--as I've pointed out, that will likely put his troops at even more risk, due to the Iranian reaction, possibly seconded by Sadr, for instance.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Jan 08 - 10:06 AM

As I said earlier -- 5 Oct 2007 12:14 AM for instance-- contrary to much rather overheated rhetoric, Bush will not invade Iran.

Why? Since, as I said then, Ahmadinejad will fall due to his own unpopularity--without Iran's developing a nuclear bomb.

His unpopularity has taken a big jump recently with deaths of over 60 Iranians, some due to gas shortages in remote and mountainous villages---(23 Jan 2007, AP, I believe.)

"..even Iran's supreme leader has implicitly rebuked his one-time protege."

Ahmadinejad "was openly humiliated when state radio read a decree by supreme leader ....Khamenei...ordering him to implement a law approved by Parliament to supply more natural gas to remote villages".

"Citing budgetary reasons, Ahmadinejad had balked at the Parliament's order to spend $1 billion from the country's currency reserve fund to supply the gas."

"But Khanmenei, who has final say on all state matters under Iran's complicated system, overruled him".

"Many view high inflation and shortages of gas and bread as particularly bitter, because Iran should be flush with oil revenues right now, from high world oil prices".

He is already losing power. "...in local municipal elections a year ago, the president's allies suffered a humiliating defeat after a majority of the seats were won by reformists and conservatives opposing Ahmadinejad".

"The gas shortage has created wide ripples. The government closed offices, schools, and universities for days because of possible shortages"

And though Bush is, by common consent, it appears, the worst president of the US ever, he is not self-destructive. Invading Iran will cause his impeachment and likely removal--the more so since it is becoming progressively more obvious that an invasion will not be necessary. Ahmadinejad will be out on his ear in June 2009 or before--with no nuclear bomb. And Bush of course in January 2009.

Anything else is a self-inflicted Leftist--or Rightist-- nightmare.

As usual, Teribus is also somewhat less than convincing, with his dire warnings about the "12 Old Gits". It's the head "Git" who has just knocked Ahmadinejad down--despite being a fundamentalist Islamic--and therefore a "Crazy Mullah", and threat to Teribus' own existence.

So now Teribus will be no longer have to be afraid of his own shadow.

Surely a positive development.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Bush Be Stopped from Invading...
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Jan 08 - 10:08 AM

It's just too bad--and bitterly ironic--that the Iranian people are suffering needlessly.