But but but....You mean no Congressional approval is necessary?
I will resist the lazy urge of viewing this through a diabolic prism of domestic power politics, i.e. that this a way of keeping the Republicans in power by maintaining the country on a war footing, keeping the military-industrial complex well oiled, obscuring the fiasco of Iraq, and claiming a continued war on terrorism... no, it is not that. I will just say that, being the responsible leader that Bush is, it is one of many contingency plans that he keeps in his top drawer
nikki- pelosi capitulated to AIPAC. if bush wants to go to war with iran, he can.
check out pat buchanan's column at antiwar.com today. there is nothing stopping bush from doing this.
hello 200$ a barrel gas. look for a mass slaughter of our troops in iraq as well.
Israel's not going for a WMD-free zone in the Middle East!
The Jewish state might just as well commit suicide!
http://burkeanreflections.blogspot.com
well donald, isn't this what is great about america? we have the freedom to root for whichever team we like. angels vs red sox, israel vs iran , me vs that guy on your blog.
god bless america
Lester
the freedom to root for whichever team we like
Go Cubbires in 2008. One World Series win Century isn't too much.
: -)
The article is a military analysis and good. To say that a war plan is in place in the current situation means someone is doing his job preparing for contingences. It is not ipso facto evidence of intent to use it.
I would think that countries in the area are much more concerned about Iran’s WMD’s that the US. Even if they only end up under fall out pattern they face much greater harm than the US. But their domestic politics precludes any active or public support of a US action to end the problem. Despite their loud protests they would not cry a tear.
Early last year Speigel had an interview with then Secretary of defense Rumsfeld.
SPIEGEL: How concerned are you about Iran?
Rumsfeld: All of us have to be concerned when a country that important, large and wealthy is disconnected from the normal interactions with the rest of the world. They obviously have certain ambitions, powers and military capabilities ...
SPIEGEL: ...and nuclear ambitions...
Rumsfeld: That's apparently what France, Germany, the UK and the International Atomic Energy Agency have concluded. Everyone wants to have the Iranians as part of the world community, but they aren't yet. Therefore there's less predictability and more danger.
SPIEGEL: The US is trying to make the case in the United Nations Security Council.
Rumsfeld: I would not say that. I thought France, Germany and the UK were working on that problem.
SPIEGEL: What kind of sanctions are we talking about?
Rumsfeld: I'm not talking about sanctions. I thought you, and the U.K. and France were.
SPIEGEL: You aren't?
Rumsfeld: I'm not talking about sanctions. You've got the lead. Well, lead!
SPIEGEL: You mean the Europeans.
Rumsfeld: Sure. My Goodness, Iran is your neighbour. We don't have to do everything!
I think it is possible that there is a Game of Chicken; will Europe become so concerned they will fly in the first wave rather than wait for unilateral US action. In the mean time events in Iran may solve the problem with out our taking action.
he's right in a sense. if the reason for attacking iran is the fear they will strike those countries, it is incumbant upon them to do the deed themselves. China and Russia don't seem to woried about an iran strike.
Commenting by HaloScan.com
