::::::::
To quote the geo-politically savvy Sergeant Schultz "I know nothing." We should be cautious when we speculate about what might happen and how it might happen. On the other hand, readiness demands that we do all we can to foresee the future.
An old song says: "Oh people, look around you the signs are everywhere." Tomorrow, is "Super Tuesday." The modus operandi of the Bush administration has been to totally integrate their foreign policies with their political operations. They've been threatening an attack on Iran for a very long time. Democrats, including both Obama and Clinton, badly dropped the ball when they went along with the Lieberman-Kyl amendment (Clinton voted for it and Obama abstained) that warned Iran about supporting insurgencies inside Iraq. Right now, the timing for an attack on Iran is what we might call "Republican perfect." What are the clues? Well, first we have the cut-off of internet connectivity throughout much of the Middle East. That's what's launched all the speculation about an imminent attack. But there are other clues. The IAEA just issued a public statement that said progress has been made on negotiations with Iran about nuclear inspections. Is the timing coincidental or was this an effort by the IAEA to go public to stand in opposition to an attack they know is coming?
Also, we just saw reports of a major suicide bombing in Iraq. How tough would it be to issue reports that the bombers were directed by Tehran? Media coming out of Iraq is 100% under US control. They can spin any story any way they want to.
And, as stated above, tomorrow is Super Tuesday. It could be a day that puts either Obama or Clinton well out in front in the race for the nomination. Now, if you wanted to showcase John McCain on the national stage and get the country to "remember their 9/11 fears and recall those nationalistic feelings", what better time to launch an attack?
Both Obama and Clinton will be forced to "support the troops" and show that they "stand with the President" and that they won't be "soft on defense." What kind of impact do you think that will have with progressives in the Democratic Party? Because Democrats are playing politics with Iraq, when pressed, they will refuse to adhere to all their campaign rhetoric about withdrawing the troops from Iraq as quickly as possible. The Democratic candidates have no soul on Iraq. They will not stand up to do the right thing. In the end, they'll be forced to go along with attacks on Iran.
BTW, one study that was reported a few years ago showed that 55% of foreign fighters (excluding the occupying US forces of course!) come from (are you ready for this?) Saudi Arabia. Gosh, I wonder if Bush, Obama and Clinton will call for attacks on Saudi Arabia. No, I'm not serious. Their oily friends wouldn't care for that.
So, starting tomorrow (or sometime over the next week or so), the politics for attacking Iran become "Republican perfect." The Democrats have no answer; they'll completely cave in. The Democrats don't represent the will of the America people who gave them back control of the Congress. The Democrats are too pathetic for words. They won't do the right thing because they really don't endorse the anti-war agenda in their hearts.
Again, this is all just wild speculation. I don't make predictions. I just analyze history and look for patterns. This pattern looks like it's ripe for bombing runs in Iran. And the eternal war continues with no opposition party to stop it. Until we make them change, they will not change. If we keep voting for them, what incentive to change will they have?
