Our President Has Declared War on Iran...already. Now Comes The Attack.

[bjobotts]

At a speech before a military audience, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Bush announced his intentions of dealing with the murderous bunch in Tehran.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/

Check out Glenn Greenwald's post over at Salon for the complete story but what I wish to emphasize here is that most of us feared this was coming for sometime now and we have been trying everything we could think of, from pushing for impeachment to getting congress to pass legislation that would force Bush to get approval before attacking Iran, all to no avail. We are much smarter since the Iraq invasion and are not falling for the "smoking gun could come in the form of a mushroom cloud" rhetoric. Yet our media is still pushing these claims. We know that Iran is at least 10yrs away from having the capacity to make a nuclear weapon. We know from experience that you just don't kill the government because nearly a million innocent Iraqis have lost their lives in Iraq and mass murder of innocent Iranians will once again happen as collateral damage. Bush forgets these are "people" we are talking about not "governments". The wrath to follow such military action will last forever against our country. Russia and China will surely become involved because they have treaties with Iran. The Bush neocons also want war with Pakistan and Syria, the real reason behind Bush needing a war czar. These war supporters always think they have all the angles covered yet it always turns into a fiasco of death and destruction. Check out these two paragraphs from Greenwald:

"The Iraq debate is over, at least from the perspective of actual results. It has been over for some time. The Congress is never going to force Bush to withdraw from Iraq. We are going to remain in Iraq in more or less the same posture through the end of the Bush presidency. That is just a fait accompli. The real issue of grave importance that remains unresolved is Iran, and it is hard to find causes for optimism there either.

There are, of course, significant steps that the Congress could take to impose at least some restraints on the Bush administration's ability to attack Iran unilaterally. It could make clear that the existing Iraq AUMF does not include authorization to attack Iran inside Iranian territory. It could enact legislation requiring Congressional approval before an attack on Iran is authorized. It could make clear that no funding will be available for any such attack in the absence of a Resolution authorizing a new war."

The funding from this occupation and the war budget could rebuild our nations infrastructure. It could easily guarantee free health insurance for all our citizens and provide free Education. Only by Congress refusing to provide the funds for this war budget and occupation can this be stopped. Only our representatives can do it.
Oil will go up to $10/gal. Our military will break. There will be untold repercussions from attacking Iran. But just look at the other side of the coin. What is the likely damage of NOT attacking Iran? Of finding a diplomatic solution for Iran/Iraq and their neighbors? Is Bush just trying to save face because he realized he strengthened Iran by supporting the Shiites in Iraq? Is that why he has begun arming the Sunnis? An attack is imminent in early Sept....right after Bush gets his war funding. The CIA leakers state that nothing can stop it from happening, that it has been carefully, and publicly laid out. It's like trying to stop Hitler before he invaded Poland. There has got to be a way to stop this madness. Please go check out the rest of the story at the above link...it's that serious. Thanks.

[Mojorabbit]

1. I just can't see

the military going along with it. I know he is crazy enough to want to do it but...

[givemebackmycountry]

2. George Bush's lasting legacy....

He may very well wind up killing more human beings than any other President.
Period.
And I think that thought makes him all warm and fuzzy inside.

[napi21]

3. I know it sure looks like that's what the idiot is going to do, but I

don't think he will. Next year...maybe, but not now. It's way too far before the election, and it would guarantee a loss for the Pubs everywhere!

I know some night think he could get away with dropping a few bombs, but rational minds know it would never end there.

I don't believe the Pubs will let 2 idiots at the head of their Party destroy them all.

[Bozita]

4. Have you been paying attention?

These folks are nuts.

[AdHocSolver]

5. The key to understand the value of attacking Iran: " 'Gas' will go up to $10/gal."

The key to understanding the war in Iraq, and the desire to attack Iran, is totally explained in that short sentence. It always amazes me why so many people consider Bush/Cheney's war is a failure, when in reality, it has fulfilled Bush/Cheney's backers' goals spectacularly well.

This situation is the same as the people in the parable who do not want to admit that the "naked king" is really naked. Just as people who are victimized by a scam refuse to face up to their victimization, the people in the U.S., and the congress, refuse to acknowledge that the reason for war in the oil-rich Middle East is to create a scarcity of oil during a time of increasing demand so as to drive the price up.

After the first Gulf War, the U.S. put an embargo on Iraqi oil to limit the output from that country and so allow our "allies" in OPEC, principally Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, to adjust oil production so as to maximize profits for themselves and Big Oil. Saddam didn't like the fact that he was being prevented from making money off of Iraqi oil, and he was looking to make side deals with countries like China to make some cash. Of course, then the other OPEC countries wouldn't be able to make profit from selling oil to those countries, and thus the push to get rid of Saddam. Therefore, the spin about nukes in Iraq, WMD's, he's a bad guy, Saddam is aiding Al Quaeda, etc.

The main reason people mistakenly think the Iraq war is a failure, is because we haven't taken over the country. However, there was never any desire to take over Iraq, just get the oil fields and stop the Iraq oil deals with China that would be outside of OPEC, and which would prevent OPEC from controlling world oil prices.

This has been accomplished. The U.S. has effectively stopped oil production in Iraq. The contracts that the oil companies want from Iraq would effectively take oil production quotas out of Iraqi hands and hand it over to the oil companies. Of course, giving away this control would mean that the Iraq congress, in effect, signed their own death warrants, which is the reason they decided on vacation in August: It was to avoid assassination by other Iraqis for selling out.

This is the real significance of Bush/Cheney's "mission accomplished" statements. There is no need to take over Iraq, so there is no need to win a war. Moreover, a civil war in Iraq serves oil interests well. If they fight each other, then they will never unite and fight to get their oil back.

The reason Bush/Cheney want to attack Iran is quite logical, considering that the Iraq war fulfilled its real goals. Iran is not a monlithic country any more than Iraq is. There are several different ethnic, tribal, and religious differences among the people in Iran, although not as much as in Iraq, which was purposely set up that way by the British to maintain their colonial influence.

However, a war with Iran, although unwinnable, would certainly reduce its oil production, and that would be a positve result to the people who want to start a war.

To understand Bush/Cheney, think of the corporate model. Cheney is the CEO and Bush is the president who have succeeded in a hostile takeover of this very profitable corporation, The USA. They have proceeded to milk it dry and then, when they have done all they can, will take off to retirement in some far off country (Paraguay?), preferably a country with no extradition treaty with the U.S.

As for "breaking" our country, did Ken Lay care what happened to Enron after he got his loot?

I will end this post with a statement that sums up the situation very well. I don't remember the exact quote, but it goes something like: "It ain't the things we don't know that give us trouble, but the things that we think we know that ain't so."

[OneBlueSky]

6. one of their major objectives in attacking Iran is to reverse . . .

Iran's switch from the U.S. dollar to the Euro for oil transactions . . . that has far more potential for devastating the U.S. than their nascent nuke program . . .

[CGowen]

7. they want yen

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20670001&sid=aLaColVYu5LA

July 13 (Bloomberg) -- Iran asked Japanese refiners to switch to the yen to pay for all crude oil purchases, after Iran's central bank said it is reducing holdings of the U.S. dollar.

Iran wants yen-based transactions ``for any/all of your forthcoming Iranian crude oil liftings,'' according to a letter sent to Japanese refiners that was signed by Ali A. Arshi, general manager of crude oil marketing and exports in Tehran at the National Iranian Oil Co. The request is for all shipments ``effective immediately,'' according to the letter, dated July 10 and obtained by Bloomberg News.

The yen rose on speculation for an increase in demand for the currency, the result of Japan's annual 1.24 trillion yen ($10.1 billion) of oil imports from Iran. Central bankers in Venezuela, Indonesia and the United Arab Emirates have said they will invest less of their reserves in dollar assets because of the weakening currency.

``What else can Japan do but to accept the request, once the oil producer sent its wish?'' said Hirofumi Kawachi, an analyst at Mizuho Investors Securities Co. in Tokyo. ``The tensions between the U.S. and Iran are escalating, and it's Iran's measure to hedge risk.''

A spokesman for Iran's oil ministry in Tehran said he could neither confirm nor deny that the letter had been sent. Most Japanese oil refiners have until now used U.S. dollars to pay Iran for oil, said the spokesman, who declined to be identified by name because of government policy.
....

[bjobotts]

9. Very interesting post adhocsolver. They are just incompetent enough

to screw even that plan up because there is always something they can't account for entering the picture...sooner or later.

[superkia]

8. Maybe Bush will bomb the hell out of Iran and then pullout of Iraq?

That way Iran cant just jump in there, they will too beaten up. And after that whoever the next president is will go back into Iraq again to try harder for that black gold.

I don't think it really matters anymore what we all think, I feel like we are deeper than we think when it comes to our governments control over us. Did I read that we now have mercenaries setting up camp in our own country? Wonder what they need them hear for. This shit has went way, way, way too far and our Democratic congress doesn't want to hold up the machine and maybe go for impeachment or something, anything.