In a little less than 30 hours it will be 4:00AM Good Friday

[left is right]

Who among us believe deep in their hearts that we will really bomb Iran? I am so worried that I can barely concentrate. I would appreciate calm and rational explanations why we do not need to worry about this. Lie to me if you have to.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

1. I can't offer any reassurances but

I'm a little more hopeful since Iran agreed to release the hostages.

[MichiganVote]

2. We aren't going to do anything with Iran...no men, no money

[ClayZ]

3. I think that Pelosi's trip will help the whole damn mess!

It is hard for bu$hbots to go in and be MEAN when someone like Pelosi has decided SHE IS READY TO MAKE NICE!

[Psephos]

4. Chill out, it positively, absolutely is not going to happen

For the simple reason that it would lead to impeachment of the President, and the annihilation of Republican chances in 2008. You can trust them to look out for their own hides now, given what happened in November.

Peace.

[Alexander]

5. There's no remotely justifiable reason to do it now.

Not that you could justify a thing like that, but since the sailors have been released, I wonder if BCF's plans just got all screwed up.

I also wonder if Iran heard the chatter about a Good Friday invasion and released the sailors first to prevent against such a thing.

[roamer65]

6. It won't happen.

Releasing the sailors on the Thursday before Good Friday has pretty much killed the idea of bombing Iran on April 6th. Cheney must be really pissed tonite.

[bdamomma]

7. and......... what supposed to happen??????

they (bush cabal) are backed against the ropes now, why speculate in a attack?

we are supposed to prevent an attack not promote one. just my opinion.

[TomInTib]

8. No way. Not on a Christian holy day.

And with the Silkworms homed on our tankers (do not think carriers, they will sink the tankers first).

We would never do anything that crazy.

Would we?

[Igel]

9. Consider the source.

A named Russian (whose track record is far from perfect) citing, in effect, anonymous sources.

Now, why would American sources leak the news to a Russian whose every word has been to say how bad the US is?

Presumably the British would know ... but would a British leaker really pass up the Guardian? Or leak it to a Russian, when German papers would be just as happy to publish the info?

The point is, there's no reason to believe the guy. Now, this is not strictly ad hominem: The fact that the analyst worked most of his life with the US as one of his chief adversaries is, at best, tangential. But if someone asks, "Do I have a reason *not* to believe the guy?" well, yes, there is a reason not to believe the guy--and it's not just because sticklers scream "that's a fallacy, shifting the burden of proof".

[pinto]

10. Grandstanding is a political ploy, not a military ploy. On all sides.

And much of the buzz is just that. Buzz.

That's my take.

:hi:

[soothsayer]

11. We won't be ready until April 17. Attack could be 17-19.

[WilliamPitt]

12. 'Scuse me?

Did I miss a memo?

[WillyT]

14. Here Ya Go...

Link: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/02/262/

:shrug:

[WilliamPitt]

15. So those sailors got released today

so Iran would look victimized if they were attacked?

Hm.

[WillyT]

16. Got Me !!!

:shrug:

[AndyA]

13. I would be surprised if we attacked Iran.

Bush doesn't have the political capital to pull that one off now. There aren't enough troops, money, or supplies to do a ground assault.

The only thing he could possibly do is drop nukes on Iran.

I just don't see that happening.

The British hostages were released, Pelosi has been over there working for peace, and there seems to be some movement in that area.

I just don't see it happening. But when you've got a douchebag who also happens to be a wack job in office, who the hell knows what's coming next?