Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What Happens With the Election When President Bush Bombs Iran?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 01:58 PM
Original message
What Happens With the Election When President Bush Bombs Iran?
Because he will and they are currently in preparation for it. What will happen to the election? Will this rally the Republican base to McCain? Will Independents get scared and rally to McCain? Will it backfire? Will Bush be charged with war crimes for this latest war of aggression?

While we're fighting with one another, this president is preparing to strike Iran. They are currently inside of Iran right now. What will this do to OUR economy and the geopolitical landscape in the Middle East? What will happen to Israel as a result? We will be mired in a war in the Middle East for decades to come and even if Obama is elected, this current administration will have effectively TIED his hands for his entire 8 year presidency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 01:59 PM
Response to Original message
1. This current scenario is EXACTLY why so many of us were screaming "IMPEACH NOW!"
Edited on Tue May-27-08 02:01 PM by truedelphi
But cooler calmer heads, like Pelosi's, thought that impeachment matters would mess up their table.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #1
14. Impeachment proceedings were instituted rather quickly against Bill Clinton.
He admitted wrongdoing in August of 1998 and by the end of the year, the House had impeached him. I don't think it's too late to at least Impeach him in the House. We may not have enough votes in the senate to convict, but the message will be sent and probably prevent Bush from going ahead with the bombing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
80. Congress didn't want to Impeach because they cared more about a historic presidential race between
Hillary & Obama.

Which is just so stupid and not to mention extremely dangerous considering there are lunatics in control of this country who no doubt don't want to give up that control!

Can you say King George? :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niyad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
2. martial law, anyone?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KaryninMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. Yes indeed- it's what many of us have been saying for a while now.
Impeaching them was the only way to stop this- and unless we start proceedings immediately-and even that may be too late- we could be in for quite a rough ride this fall. They are not going to simply give up the power without a huge fight- nor are they going to ask Congress for permission before they drop a bomb on Iran- nor do they give a shit anyway- these are criminals who believe the law doesn't apply to them, in case anyone hasn't noticed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #8
16. Artciles of Impeachment need to be drawn up as soon as possible.
There are SO MANY charges, the articles of impeachment would probably be the size of the 9/11 Report. We need to do this NOW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #8
41. dystopian codswallop. Secular apocalyptism.
First of all, it's clear that bush is itching to get out of Dodge. The neocon faction is severely weakened. And who the hell is going to impose martial law? No, Blackwater does not have enough personnel to do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chulanowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #41
77. Agreed. Martial law is paranoid fantasy
Even if every US serviceman and police precinct were called in from every corner of the world, it would be impossible to enforce. Maybe in a few large, key cities... New York, DC, Los Angeles, there could be some enforcement of it. But the United States just has far too much turf for any actual military control.

We have a great strike force military... But as an occupying force, we really, really suck hard. We can barely control one city in rinky-dink Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Martial law, cancelled elections, long live King George.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puzzler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #9
49. Not quite...
... I dunno about cancelling the elections, but if, for argument's sake that happened, Bush and Cheney are still automatically out in January and the reins of power go to Pelosi... since she's 3rd in line. In other words, if the GOP try to fuck with things, Pelosi gets the presidency next year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TBF Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #49
76. Hmmm if that is true maybe this is why she said "impeachment is off the table" -
I wish we'd get it back on. Bush/Cheney not only deserve impeachment, but also trial for war crimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #2
28. why? Iran is getting bombed, not us
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niyad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #28
38. oh, maybe because the bombing of iran would be related to national security and some
sort of threat? what part of this do you not understand?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #38
42. too much, I been reading Scott Ritter lately
They are less of a threat than the non-threat of Saddam.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niyad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #42
65. I read ritter too. apparently you misunderstood. WE know there is no
real threat from iran, just as there was no real threat from saddam. but facts have never mattered to this admin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #65
68. Exactly. I don't understand why people give this administration any
benefit of the doubt. They had absolutely zero evidence for invading Iraq. They manufactured evidence. What about THAT is not getting through. They are using the same rationale for invading Iraq (WMD) now for Iran. WTF? They are FRANTICALLY trying to come up with some intelligence they can finagle to make it look like Iran has WMD. They are inside of Iran trying to causing mischief to provoke Iran into openly attacking our soldiers in Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #68
72. they are doing a much worse job of making up shit about Iran
They were much better making up nonsense about Iraq than they are about Iran. They seem to be going back and forth between Iran giving insurgents weapons and Iran's nuclear program but something always keeps coming up blowing huge gaping holes in their stories.

Hear anything lately about Iran proving weapons to insurgents?

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2008/05/iraq-the-elusiv.html

So now they back to the non-nuclear weapons program that Iran does not have.

The evidence is much worse than it was for Iraq and they are convincing very few people, especially in the Pentagon.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #72
75. Well good. I know they've been having trouble coming up with good stories
but I mean, what happened before we invaded Iraq? We had people on the street protesting, millions, protesting because we knew they didn't have WMD. That didn't stop them. I'm thinking they will come up with some lie and people will believe it. Problem is, they don't yet have anyone credible enough to deliver the lie to the American people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #75
81. .
Edited on Tue May-27-08 03:57 PM by redstate_democrat
US, allies say UN report bolsters fears Iran wants nuclear bomb

1 hour ago

WASHINGTON (AFP) — The United States said Tuesday that Iran's refusal to respond to queries from the UN atomic watchdog is "very troubling," warning its behavior bolstered suspicions it aimed to build a nuclear bomb.

...snipped...

The IAEA on Monday expressed "serious concern" that Iran is still hiding information about alleged studies into making nuclear warheads and defying UN demands to suspend uranium enrichment.

The alleged studies comprise a uranium conversion project, high explosives testing and designs for a missile re-entry vehicle, and suggest there may have been a possible military angle to past nuclear work.

The report "refers to the fact that the Iranians are willfully -- trying to willfully withhold information about their activities related to potential weaponization," McCormack told reporters in Washington.

"There are a number of different questions out there about the military's involvement in this nuclear program, about Iran's efforts to fabricate hemispheres of uranium," he said.

"And I'm not sure other than for a weapon why you would do that," McCormack added.

Washington has in the past pointed to IAEA inquiries into Iran's possession of blueprints for making the uranium metal hemispheres that are the core of bombs as signs of military intentions.

McCormack called the new report "very troubling" and "disturbing," adding: "And we'll see what diplomatic next step will flow from this."

...snipped...

Solana has been struggling to establish high-level talks aimed at getting Iran to accept the package but Tehran refuses to suspend enrichment as a precondition for negotiating.

Iran insists it has the right to enrich uranium to make nuclear fuel to help meet its electricity needs and has so far defied three sets of Security Council resolutions which demand it halt the process.

At highly refined levels, such work can also make the fissile core of an atomic bomb but Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful and has vehemently denied that it is seeking to make weapons with it.

In Paris, French foreign ministry spokeswoman Pascale Andreani said the details mentioned in the report "could be the sign of a possible military dimension of the Iranian nuclear program."

In Berlin, German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said the report "leaves open a number of questions that we will have to examine very quickly."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ingac70 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
3. I look for that shit to happen...
I can only hope such an action prevents any Republican control of our government for the rest of my life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nichomachus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
4. You can't change horsemen in the middle of an apocalypse
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
5. Not going to happen
Keep your eye on the ball.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #5
17. No it really is about to happen. I didn't think so a while back, but basically,
they are planning to do just exactly that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #17
29. its been "about to happen" for 2 years now
Edited on Tue May-27-08 02:25 PM by LSK
You are new here but I have been reading these threads for 2+ years on this website.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #29
61. Precisely. For two years the same baseless threads.
Its the equivilent of the German invasion of Russia in WWII. Maybe we are more sane than that, Id hope (not saying much).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LucyParsons Donating Member (938 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
6. A draft would necessarily have to follow shortly
Which, in turn, would be followed by mass civil unrest and disobedience. Remember that 60 Minutes report about the Millennials?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #6
18. McCain is supposedly against the draft. We shall see, huh?
We shall see how he capitulates to Bush on this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #18
27. Don't expect Bush to leave office if he bombs Iran. The elections will be cancelled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LakeSamish706 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #27
34. And that to me would be the basic reason alone for this Administration...
bombing Iran. They would do just that in order to steal permanent control in this country, forget the fact that many, many people would lose there lives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #27
45. lol. and you really think the dem majority will just acquiece to that?
You think the military will? You think the American public will accept it?]

Utter hogwash.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #45
54. No I don't, unless something happens on our soil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mme. Defarge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #27
64. I don't think they will be cancelled if the contest
is between Hillary and McCain. Obama v. McCain is another matter, however.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #64
67. interesting and good point
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
against all enemies Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:03 PM
Response to Original message
7. "Bomb, Bomb Iran" will become McCain's theme song.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. It already is.
:)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:05 PM
Response to Original message
10. I wouldn't say "when", but "if".
I remember back in the 2004 election cycle that it was popular around here to predict that Bush would conjure up another big terror incident here to keep people in line. Did I miss that? Watch out with the sky is falling predictions because come the time when the sky might actually fall many will not believe it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niyad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #10
36. well, in 2004 they knew they had the election fixed (courtesy of diebold, etc)
maybe this time they are concerned about how closely the elction results will be watched.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #36
82. That doesn't say much for the Democrats, does it?
The Republicans all but tell us that they will steal the election and they still manage to do it even though we had the promise that every vote would count and every vote would be counted. Feckless: "feeble or ineffective". Will it be different this time?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LakeSamish706 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
11. Given the fact that Russia and China signed an agreement that calls for no...
military options against Iran. I see some pretty serious shit happening if the US does hit Iran. This would lead me to believe that both Russia and China would not sit idly by well the US struck Iran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #11
20. I beleive they will be the biggest benefactors if we were stupid enough to get ourselves wrapped up
in yet a third war in the Middle East. It's sort of like how the Soviet Union was finally destroyed, not from the outside in, but from the inside out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:12 PM
Response to Original message
13. Gas jumps to $10 a gallon.
Bush tries to impose marital law, but the good old boys ignore it and march on Washington. Bush will be undone by his own base.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #13
21. Poetic Justice if it were HIS base to turn on him. We need a revolution
in this country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
invictus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #13
24. Only $10? I pay $4+/gallon right now. If idiot attacks Iran, gas is going $20+ and since idiot is ..
... an oil man, he will be lining his pockets with his undo profits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
15. Pardon my ignorance...
... but wouldn't the congress have to vote on some resolution authorizing force? Or has that already been done? Or will he do it without one?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. The wise and wonderful souls who occupy the seats in Congress already
Authorised this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #19
48. no they haven't, and bush has the authority under the constitution
and the War Powers Act without any need of Congressional authority.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #48
63. But does this authority give him preemptive power to strike when we aren't
under any attack? The constitution expressly gives joint power to congress and the president. Bush can only strike if we are attacked or at least get authorization at a later time for a declaration of war from congress. What possible rationale would Bush have for bombing Iran? Of course Iran would strike back, so this would be used as a rationale for continuing the war. This would be basically forcing a country into war... a war of aggression.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #15
22. That's the whole sticky part of Kyl-Lieberman
while it doesn't give him express approval, it declares the guard a terrorist organization. and since we're in a "war on terror," Bush could make the case that it meant ok to attack. And he has Iraq as a precedent for this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Plus Rumsfeld or Ashcroft mentioned some years ago
That when the American public gets too comfy and too unaware of the need for wars on terror, that another attack will help them change their attitude.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #22
39. Kyl-Lieberman, eh?
Nice. Thanks again, Hillary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #15
26. COngress has already given him authorization. Thank Senator Kyl and Senator Lieberman for that.
However, Rep. John Conyers sent Bush a nasty letter threatening impeachment if Bush were to preemptively strike Iran without congressional "authorization". Like Bush gives a crap about that. He has claimed that he has authorization just like the IWR gave him authorization. Congress has failed in its job to maintain itself as a separate branch of government. It is abdicated its power to the executive branch time after time and then it bitches and moans and claims the executive branch has assumed too much power. Oh, yeah? I wonder WHY? Could it be because YOU aren't doing your job? Congress has failed the American people by allowing this war criminal to stay in office. It has failed by consistently transferring its constitutionally granted powers over to the executive branch. The ONLY thing they can do to fix this is by impeaching the criminals and assisting with bringing international charges for war crimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #15
46. Kyl Lieberman
Might be used as justification.

Our own sweetheart HRC voted for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Benhurst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #46
52. And Obama was a no show.
Edited on Tue May-27-08 02:46 PM by Benhurst
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2007/11/3/15518/8255

Neither comes off well on this.

I little to no faith in our leaders if Bush stages a takeover.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lerkfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
25. they're HOPING it will grease the skids for McCain
or else they are hoping it will lead to martial law.

or they really don't care cause Halliburton will get their money no matter who is president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #25
44. I think these war criminals are trying to destabilize the Middle East, thus ensuring our continued
presence there for years to come. Remember when McCain said we could be in Iraq for 100 years? Then just recently he said 5 years? I wonder why? He doesn't really believe that, but he has to seem sane right now in the face of American discontent with the war. But he knows that he won't have to keep that promise if we were to strike Iran because what do you think Iran will do?

Iran will swarm our poor soldiers in Iraq and the entire Middle East will implode on itself. There will be no secret what the United States has been and is up to anymore. It will be made clear for the entire world. Do you think the entire world will stand by and allow it any further? We are simply taking out anyone in the Middle East who does not capitulate to our every whim. Once Iran strikes back, and they will, we will be forced to reinstitute the draft. McCain said last year that he doesn't agree with the draft as is now because it unfairly targets poor people. He said THIS last October 2007. I don't believe him, but this is what he said. We will have to re-institute the draft. You know, the past eight years have been looking a lot like pre World War II conditions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cbc5g Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
30. Bush is planning something to keep the RW'ers and security moms/nascar dads in line
And it scares me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cbc5g Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
31. Also, an Osama video wouldn't surprise me
They did the same thing before the 2004 vote, claiming Osama supports Kerry because 'Kerry won't go after terrorists'...sigh
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. those things dont work anymore
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cbc5g Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. I wish you were right but I have no faith in a lot of the electorate
A lot of people are moved by fear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #33
37. fear is a short term thing, many are dull to it now
The fear has passed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cbc5g Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #37
43. I can see it now
FOX NEWS ALERT : "New Obama, err Osama video has come out condemning America and praising Obama's want to leave Iraq"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
35. According to many DUers the imminent attack on Iran has been imminent
for years now. Excuse me if I have doubts that it will happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #35
51. I think the intended effect has been successful.
If you talk about something long enough, people become desensitized to it. It becomes the "expected" outcome. I think they have been successful on this front because many people on here are saying, "I don't think so. They've been saying this for awhile". If I've learned one thing from these people is that you should never underestimate them.

Cheney seems rather jovial these days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #51
58. Look, I'm not saying they won't bomb Iran. I'm not saying they will.
I damn well am saying they won't suspend elections or impose martial law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #58
60. They probably won't suspend elections or impose martial law.
But what I am saying is that they will try to create a situation that will tie the next president's hand on Iraq and guarantee our continued presence there for years to come.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
40. If we're lucky 30 million americans will storm the WH and arrest everyone
present. Unfortunately the US will probably be under attack by Iran and all of her sympathizers within 1/2 hr after Schlock and Augggh II.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #40
47. 1,000,000 person army
ivades Iraq vs 150,000 army that is scattered accross the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #47
53. and our soldiers are slaughtered.
Edited on Tue May-27-08 02:45 PM by redstate_democrat
Our soldiers need to get the hell out of there. They are sitting in the middle of a fucking trap.

Who will protect the "Homeland"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #53
66. The "homeland"
Edited on Tue May-27-08 03:15 PM by Jake3463
Would be safe regardless thanks to our domination of a continent.

I'm more worried about other hot spots.

Israel,S. Korea, and former Soviet Republics.

A destroyed US army invites other countries to invade.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #66
71. Explain this further for me.
Edited on Tue May-27-08 03:23 PM by redstate_democrat
You say we would be safe because of geography? Of course I worry about other countries, but our military is stretched so thin right now. We are all over the world, but we have fewer troops here at home. Our equipment is stretched thin. Our "talent" is stretched thin. I have zero confidence in this administration when it comes to planning military matters. The "war" that will be brought to our shores will not be in the traditional sense. We are living in a new world right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #71
74. We would be safe
from an invasion by another country. No country has the Navy to project itself into landing an invasion force on US soil. We are right now and always have been vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Regardless of whether Iran attacks we are in the same danger now as we would be if there was an Iranian invasion into Iraq against our forces spurred by US bombing.

If we had a hurricane that wiped out all refineries in the gulf of Mexico we are vulnerable for massive civil unrest as well.

My fear for the rest of the world would be a defeated US army in Iraq would encourage other countries like N.Korea, China, or Russia to invade their neighbors since short of dropping a nuclear weapon we'd be unable to stop them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #74
78. Im with you as far as N. Korea, China, Russia is concerned.
But as far as being attacked right here, I'm not so sure. I don't think we would be attacked in the traditional sense. I think situations would be created to attack us from within... hitting oil refineries and offshore drilling, destabilizing energy sources, attacks on systems running purely on technology, cyber attacks on business and government, attacks on the ground level in various cities, bombings at various border entrances, etc. Smaller things than full scale invasion, which would cause massive panic around the world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #78
79. Possible
Edited on Tue May-27-08 03:40 PM by Jake3463
The only country I think is capable of pulling that off would be China.

Iran would be more of a crush them in Iraq and keep moving westward disaster.

Israel would probably also sometime at that point use Nukes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:37 PM
Response to Original message
50. come the revolution, that's what.
that had better be it for everyone. or else.
these guys are trying to get out ahead of it. you should, too. go on record, at the very least.

http://www.nowaroniran-chicago.org/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #50
57. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EmeraldCityGrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
55. The DRAFT dialog will begin in earnest. See how unpopular this war REALLY becomes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #55
59. The only way America can save itself is if we hand Bush, Cheney, and the rest of these war criminals
over to an international tribunal for war crimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
susankh4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
56. K&R
Fabulous photo of Michelle, BTW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
62. If he bombs Iran, Democrats will win by the greatest landslide in history. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #62
69. If we have an election
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
70. there will be an election
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #70
73. Yes, but will this action basically tie the hands of the next president.
We would literally be electing a NEW president, but will this action force the current Middle Eastern policy to continue past Bush's presidency? Will we be forced to stay there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 15th 2024, 06:11 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC