Will President Bush Invade Iran?

Dash dot you might be right but arent the stock markets in India and china already oevr bloated and anyway due for a correction, how much greater would be the impact of high oil prices, large curent acount deficits, inflationary pressures, Global recesion and regional political and economic instability

tahmed
ahmednijad might be a religous nut but he couldnt have chosen a better time to seek confrontation with the US/Israel than now with US forces occupied in afghanistan and iraq, his ability to make life tough for the US there, his leverage over oil, and he is purposely seeking confrontation with israel a)to win the sympathy of muslims and arabs and to prevent them assisting the US (in which he has succeeded with saudi and the gulf states requesting the US to desist, especially because they know it will hurt their resurgent economies and their real estate booms)

b)he knows that at some point confrontation was inevitable with both israel and the US if he were to build nukes what better time than now when there is so much antipathy against their policies in palestine and Lebanon (which he fueled) and Iraq (in which he/iran is playing good cop/bad cop) Kurdistan is another area where he could create problems or atleast choke oil from

If he succeeds he will become the only third world/muslim guy to get away with militarily challenging the US Hugo chavez is not nuclear armed remember

c)it makes him powerful domestically and regionally and gives iran prominence

d)

good cop bad cop in the sense he is preventing too much troubl so that shias remain in power but is assiting the shia and some say the sunnis too trhough training and explosives as he is doing in afghanistan.

but this is no diff. from the US policy of first supporting saddam to neutralize iran and when they saw saddam winning then resuming support to Iran in order to prevent him from winning during the iran iraq war

the question is does the US have the balls to attack or allow Israel to do so, though that will be stupid because Israeli attack will not be big enough to prevent a mojor iranian response in the persian gulf.

second question is once atacked does iran have the balls to respond strongly and thirdly will they have enough survivable strength to respond

and the iranians are not as stupid as you think they first offered to assist the US in Afghanistan because they had had a short skirmish with the taliban just short of a war, but the US rebuffed them and then came the axis of evil speech they knew they were in the US cross hair and that the US knew they were building nukes and would try to stop them that is when they started tying down the US in afghanistan and iraq. they didnt oppose the US invasion of Iraq hoping that after a thousand years finally shias will control baghdad and that the shia will be sympathetic too them creating a large belt of shia territory plus they could tie down the US through their agents and proxies,they are even assisting the alqaida elemnts

They know confrontation is inevitable then the best time is now. In fact it doesnt even matter democrat or republican the admin. will have to take action that is why Hillary is so encouraging she is hoping Bush does it so she doesnt cop the blame and when she is in office if things dont turn out well she can always blame the previous admin.

Zeemax#51:

In a historical sense, oil prices had started to go up before the Yom Kippur war. Ironically, it was the Shah of Iran, the staunch US ally who was the initiator of a higher oil price. He argued that oil producing countries were not getting a fair price, that the price of the commodities that they purchased had gone up manifold while the price of oil had remained unchanged for decades at around two dollars (yes folks, gas was 35 cents a gallon when I first filled my tank in the sixties). If I recall correctly, he was instrumental in creating OPEC and then raising the price by about 20% to above three dollars.

...and one should remember that the current price of $100 includes, to some extent, the risk of attack on Iran.

CreateAlpha#73:
"DM sahib, what is wrong with the fragmentation of the jihadi mindset across the world?"

Actually, even though shias and sunnys are fighting in Iraq, the umma is more united than ever before on perceiving the US as its enemy. This includes secular Turks, the wahabi Saudis, the Sunni and Shia Iraqis, the "moderate" Malaysians and Indonesians, the subcontinental Muslims and even those living in the West, barring a few exceptions; an attack on Iran will unite them more more. Nothing unites the Umma more than the slogan of "Islam in danger".

hamidm#78:

"..... or is it all about israel? "

The question suggests that you underestimate the importance of the neocon lobby.
But no, Iraq was not just about Israel. Dick Chenny's friends in the oil business have done very well, thank you, as has everyone associated with weapons industry and defence-related sectors of the economy.

This is the best geo strategic confrontation since the vietnam war, it will be short but its impact possibly global, and both parties are not completely rational, Bush listens to his inner voice, and ahmednijad sees angels. But both are restricted due to systemic constraints (yes ahmednijad is too, apparently the republican guard whom he he was supported by and inturn whom he made the most powerful interest group in Iran has apparently turned against its benefactor since they know they will be the first target in case of a US atack, plus there is the supreme religous council of the mullah's in Qom who actually control the military and police)

Bush is restricted by the compulsions of democratic politics and economic/military considerations but is also spurred by other compulsions like lobby groups, US security Interests and his inner voice.

Most interesting is what will be the regional and international fall out of this struggle and what course the military action will take.

Dost Mittar despite conspiracy theories Dick Cheney doesnot control Bush or the US military.

Every body supported the Iraq war including such non neo cons as Hillary Clinton, Mccain, friedman, fareed Zakaria the list is endless they all were not pumping for cheney's friends in the defence industry

borivili #98: What is Ahmedinijad trying to achieve? From your post, it seems it is the following:

1. "If he succeeds he will become the only third world/muslim guy to get away with militarily challenging the US "

2. "it makes him powerful domestically and regionally and gives iran prominence"

Both these reasons are decidedly unworthy:

On 1., military confrontations are not schoolyard fights where you set a goal of showing everyone else how big you are by taking on the biggest guy in class. There have to be more important reasons.

On 2., having foreign confrontations in order to boost your domestic power is a dirty trick played by dictators and power-hungry politicians on the very people they claim to represent. Similarly, while violence and military confrontations may "win" a country a spot in newspaper front pages, may God give such "prominence" to one's enemies. National leaders owe basic freedoms, peace and prosperity to their constituents, not "prominence" to the nation.

This desire to be the "light of ummah" / "the most powerful muslim guy is going to be the cause of downfall of the muslims in the modern age.
The Prophet may be a successful belligerent bandit out to loot other tribes and subdue them in the name of his Allah. But to think that in the modern world this Bedouin strategy is what Sunnat is all about is plain imbecility. Perhaps muslim psyche is a fractured one which is full of thoughts of violence towards others and one self!! This is truly psychotic self abnegation in the name of a non existent moon deity.

But then why does any country seek nuclear weapons and powers, say India which felt threatened by China or Pakistan which needed to for India.

Similarly Iran feels its foreign policy is constrained by the fact that it doesnot have nuclear weapons and Israel and US do.

The question is can the mullahss in Qom be trusted with Nuclear weapons I think they can and are rational actors

But then whith a people who cry, whip and bleed themselves every year for an injustice commited 1400 years ago you never know ,)

Tahmed I can understand hindus hating Iran they are just cussed people but why should one hold it against Iran to challenge US/Israeli hegemony in the middle east.

A bully must be challenged. If you have the balls you might expose him else he will tear you down.

Also I loved the way hindu india dumped iran, when even chinese absatined from voting, the Indians twice voted in favor of US sponsored resolution in the UN to prevent Iran from getting exactly the same things the Indians have always protested are a birth right every country must have.

The Mahabharat teaches hindus treachery and backstabbing for a few crumbs from the US they proved themselves and hypocrites and even back stabbed their old friends. I am sure even the Iranians must have been stumped.

The only honorable people in India appear to be communists, they are opposing India becoming a tool of US foreign policy and providing bases for bombing Iran. India doesnt have the honor to do what even the Saudis, the implacable foes of the Iranians told the US, that is they do not see any threat from Iran and oppose any military action against it.

Borivilli mian,

(The Mahabharat teaches hindus treachery and backstabbing for a few crumbs from the US they proved themselves and hypocrites and even back stabbed their old friends. )

And from which Book did your beloved leader Gen. Mush learn to spray good Mominas with white phosphorus for a few crumbs from the US.

Regards