Which false flag operation is the US govt likely to use for support vs Iran?

[freedomburns]

All of these options are taken from historical examples of the US government engaging in deception in order to get its citizenry to support a war. There is no way that the people of the United States are willing to support another war after the disaster which Iraq has become.

But what if Iran threatens to nuke us? Or what if Iran shoots down a US civilian jetliner?  Or what if possibly Iranian-backed leftist guerillas attacked a US embassy in Athens, Greece?  (happened yesterday, btw)

Then all bets are off and it's, "Damn the torpedoes! Full steam ahead!" Right?

I don't think so. I think the American people are waking up to the reality behind these kinds of deceptions and the money involved in the war machine.

fb

[Kevin]

You make Cynthia McKenney look like Rick Santorum.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

You make Cynthia McKenney look like Rick Santorum.

Some of his criticisms are entirely valid though, all of the above options have been done\have been considered by US foreign policy chiefs in the past 50 or so years. Where's that thread I did about Operation Northwoods?

Though I doubt that an invasion of Iran is now on the cards given the political unpopularity of Iraq, this of course is presuming that nothing dramatic happens in the next 2 years.

EDIT: I HATE TYPOS.

[Kevin]

You make Cynthia McKenney look like Rick Santorum.

Some of his criticisms are entirely vapid though, all of the above options have been done\have been considered by US foreign policy chiefs in the past 50 or so years. Where's that thread I did about Operation Northwoods?

Though I doubt that an invasion of Iran is now on the cards given the political unpopularity of Iraq, this of course is presuming that nothing dramatic happens in the next 2 years.

If an invasion of Iran did happen the US probley would have to be provoked by Iran which could happen.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

You make Cynthia McKenney look like Rick Santorum.

It's a direct rip off of a DU poll.

[Eraserhead]

You make Cynthia McKenney look like Rick Santorum.

Some of his criticisms are entirely vapid though, all of the above options have been done\have been considered by US foreign policy chiefs in the past 50 or so years. Where's that thread I did about Operation Northwoods?

Though I doubt that an invasion of Iran is now on the cards given the political unpopularity of Iraq, this of course is presuming that nothing dramatic happens in the next 2 years.

If an invasion of Iran did happen the US probley would have to be provoked by Iran which could happen.

Just like we were provoked by Iraq right?

[minionofmidas]

All of the Above.

[MasterJedi]

How about we not listen to the crazy pothead?

[Colin]

The only way President Bush could get support for an attack on Iran would be a Gulf of Tonkin style incident being developed, ie either an actual attack or a percieved attack on the American military by Iran.

[bullmoose88]

How about we not listen to the crazy pothead?

as opposed to the recovered alcoholic/cokehead?

[Tetro Kornbluth]

This thread isn't actually that crazy (Except for the perhaps the "Blame the Jew" option in the poll), though as I said before it's unlikely that the US will risk a war with Iran at this stage providing the geopolitical situation remains relatively unchanged - just too politically unpopular.

Though at present, many impersonal (and some not so impersonal) forces are at work driving the Middle east into a major regionwide conflict.

[DownWithTheLeft]

As a staunch imperalism, I support the idea of invading Iran as a means boosting of our economy and extending our influence in the world.  I don't need a false reason I'm all for invasion right now although I think we should take over weaker nations first.

[Ebowed]

I support the idea of invading Iran as a means boosting of our economy and extending our influence in the world.

Because that worked so well with Iraq...

[bullmoose88]

I support the idea of invading Iran as a means boosting of our economy and extending our influence in the world.

Because that worked so well with Iraq...

When you've lost so much of your soft power and need to use your military for hegemony...your days as a superpower are numbered.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I support the idea of invading Iran as a means boosting of our economy and extending our influence in the world.

Because that worked so well with Iraq...

Notice I said that we should invade weaker countries, and I still judge the War in Iraq a slight success with the possiblity to be a great success if the country can rally together.

United we stand, divided we fall

Does not get much simplier than that

[Joe Republic]

I still judge the War in Iraq a slight success with the possiblity to be a great success if the country can rally together.

United we stand, divided we fall

Does not get much simplier than that

And given that the idea of the country 'rallying together' to invade Iran is truly the stuff of fantasy...?

[MaC]

I support the idea of invading Iran as a means boosting of our economy and extending our influence in the world.

Because that worked so well with Iraq...

Notice I said that we should invade weaker countries, and I still judge the War in Iraq a slight success with the possiblity to be a great success if the country can rally together.

United we stand, divided we fall

Does not get much simplier than that

Dude, Iran is three times the size of Iraq.  Iraq wasn't a sucess, in of itself or in efficiency of using their economy to build ours, so how they hell do you propose a serious invasion of Iran?

[Tetro Kornbluth]

I support the idea of invading Iran as a means boosting of our economy and extending our influence in the world.

Because that worked so well with Iraq...

Notice I said that we should invade weaker countries, and I still judge the War in Iraq a slight success with the possiblity to be a great success if the country can rally together.

United we stand, divided we fall

Does not get much simplier than that

Dude, Iran is three times the size of Iraq.  Iraq wasn't a sucess, in of itself or in efficiency of using their economy to build ours, so how they hell do you propose a serious invasion of Iran?

Not to mention the strength of the Actual combat ready Iranian army compared to what Saddam had in 2003.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I said it would be easier to invade another country but I would support an Iranian invasion.  Using united we stand, etc. was in relation to Iraq saying we need to put differences aside to help America.  Politicians need to stop trying politicize the war and get personal gains from it

[Tetro Kornbluth]

I said it would be easier to invade another country but I would support an Iranian invasion.  Using united we stand, etc. was in relation to Iraq saying we need to put differences aside to help America.  Politicians need to stop trying politicize the war and get personal gains from it

Like Dick Cheney and Halliburton?

Why not invade all the nations with dictators which the US has propped up in it's history and still does. Good Ol' ally Uzbekistan would be a start. And get to Zimbabwe quickly please.

[Colin]

I said it would be easier to invade another country but I would support an Iranian invasion.  Using united we stand, etc. was in relation to Iraq saying we need to put differences aside to help America.  Politicians need to stop trying politicize the war and get personal gains from it

Like Dick Cheney and Halliburton?

Why not invade all the nations with dictators which the US has propped up in it's history and still does. Good Ol' ally Uzbekistan would be a start.

Well actually we have stopped supporting Islam Karimov. We rightly said that we were unhappy with his crushing of dissidents in the Fergana Valley a few years ago. Because of that he forced us to move our troops and bases out of Uzbekistan and we haven't given him aid since.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We have never supported Mugabe but I think that an American colony in Zimbabwe would probably be an improvement over the current situation especially since I read that a poll conducted in Zimbabwe a year or so ago stated that more people in Zimbabwe would rather have the rascist white minority government of Ian Smith back than continue to live under Mugabe.

But yes an invasion of Iran would be completely different than the actual war part of the Iraqi War. Iran, first off, actually has a functional military force. It has a 650,000 man army which includes 125,000 Revolutionary Guards, who are elite troops in every sense of the word, as well as a rather dynamic air force for a Middle Eastern nation, probably wouldn't stand a chance but would put up a good fight. They've been producing an Iranian varient of the F-5 for several years now which would pack quite a punch. The Iranian Army has a very large number of tanks of which several are Iranian produced, the Zulfiqar is basically a meshing of the T-72, older American tanks like the M60 and some components from the M1 Abrams. Their air force includes aircraft such as the MiG-29 and the F-14 as well as a newly produced Iranian semi-stealth light fighter.

Overall they are a very dangerous country militarily and given the size of the country as well as the strength of the military it could easily grind down into a long ground war.

[MaC]

Politicians need to stop trying politicize the war and get personal gains from it

Haha, good luck with that. (statement goes for all wars btw)

[bullmoose88]

I thought they couldnt fly their f 14s for lack of parts

[Colin]

I thought they couldnt fly their f 14s for lack of parts

Possibly though I'm sure either Wikipedia or GlobalSecurity would have said something about that.

[GMantis]

I said it would be easier to invade another country but I would support an Iranian invasion.  Using united we stand, etc. was in relation to Iraq saying we need to put differences aside to help America.  Politicians need to stop trying politicize the war and get personal gains from it

And which countries should be invaded next?