2007: The year the U.S. attacks Iran?
Are President Bush’s recent moves leading up to the attack on Iran that some had expected to happen last fall? Let’s look at the list:
- The appointment of Admiral William Fallon (an expert in naval aviation, not ground operations) as the theater commander for the region
- Bush’s speech on January 10th, which contained saber rattling toward both Iran and Syria
- Another aircraft-carrier battle group being sent to the Persian Gulf
- Patriot anti-missile batteries being sent to the region
- A provocative U.S. raid on an Iranian consulate in the Iraqi Kurdish city of Irbil
Of course, White House spokesman (and professional weasel) Tony Snow dismissed talk of an upcoming attack as being just an urban legend and others in the administration tried to somehow back away from the President’s aggressive language, but then today Secretary of Defense William Gates said that the additional troops being sent to Iraq, the movement of the carrier group, and the deployment of the Patriot missiles were all intended as a show of strength against Iran.
Does the President even have the authority to launch an attack on Iran? It doesn’t really matter, because this administration has shown time and again that they think they are above the law. They’ll start the bombing (based on either a clumsily provoked Iranian action or something they just make up), and then do their best to bluster and lie their way out of any legal or political repercussions. Unfortunately, the repercussions for the people of Iran (and the entire region), for the American military, and for the rest of us too, will be harder to avoid.
Worst President ever.
I’m seriously considering going to the protest march on DC on the 27th to show my opinion on this topic (and considering how I feel about crowds of that magnitude…)
Comment made by LAG on January 15, 2007 @ 8:37 pm
I think I tend to be of the opinion that those in power (especially Bush and his cronies) have long since learned to ignore the marches, no matter how many people show up. Which doesn’t mean that they aren’t still useful for energizing people.
Comment made by Michael on January 15, 2007 @ 8:46 pm
True, Bush et al won’t pay any attention whatsoever, any more than he has ever paid attention to anything other than the little voice in his ear. But marches are good for letting other people (in this country and elsewhere) aware of the fact that we’re not lockstep behind the Chimp-in-Chief….
(I used to insist on respect for the office, if not the man. I can’t even muster that any longer…)
Comment made by LAG on January 15, 2007 @ 9:26 pm
I keep having to think to myself.
“Is Bush/Cheney really *that* stupid?”
Is he trying to merely saber rattle Iran, or he is actually looking to go all the way?
I can only hope that they took a look at Israel’s atrocious attempt at an air war in Lebanon and just reduce it to “my d!ck is big” saber rattling without pressing the button.
A war with Iran would NOT unite the country behind him, it would finally be the one thing that would get a bipartisan articles of impeachment drawn up. But Bush knows that
Doesn’t he?
Doesn’t he?
Comment made by Paul on January 15, 2007 @ 9:43 pm
The problem is that it seems every time someone says that Bush and his crew can’t possibly be stupid enough to do something, they usually end up doing it.
They’re not limited by their stupidity, they’re powered by it.
Comment made by Michael on January 15, 2007 @ 9:53 pm