Posted on 01/19/2012 10:07:23 PM PST by emax
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/west-of-eden/will-a-u-s-attack-on-iran-become-obama-s-october-surprise-1.403898
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/around-the-world-abc-news/u-iran-collision-course-074216893.html
From first link:
"Two things are certain: the Republicans, who are now goading Obama for being soft on Iran and beating their own war drums, would reverse course in mid air with nary a blink and accuse the president of playing politics with American lives and needlessly embroiling it in a war which probably could have been avoided if he had been tough on Iran in the first place.
And what about the Jewish vote? That would be Obama’s, lock, stock and barrel, including those Jewish voters who cannot forgive him for the Cairo speech, the bow to King Abdullah, the 1967 borders, the lack of chemistry with Netanyahu and that the fact that he has yet to produce evidence that he isn’t, after all, a closet Muslim.
And in Israel, no doubt about it, he would be forever revered as the ultimate Righteous Gentile."
Of course, whether or not a minute part of him cares about being a Righteous Gentile in Israel is another story entirely
That is in all honesty what i was thinking he would do. Something that shows he can do :something” about Iran but falling short enough of all out military ground invasion. It would allow him to play both sides of the fence and get mainstream AMericans behind him. The thing is, even with a Republican president in charge I would be unsure how they would be able to start a full scale ground invasion and occupation of Iran. And the draft reason I mentioned is one of them; how would a president possibly convince the majority of Americans that Iran, which for all the bad things about it has made virtually no military offences against another nation in 30 years, is enough of a threat that we need to bring back the draft, which would likely be crucial in a full invasion of Iran ?
“We’re highly likely to be seeing $5+/gallon gas by November. Even a new crusade couldn’t save Obama from that.”
Obama will lose on domestic issues; the unemployment and unreported inflation will sink him, because there is no way for his media to conceal it. If gas prices remain as they are now, he will lose handily.
Americans vote in their best interests, and paying for groceries trumps wars halfway around the world of dubious value.
Pakistan is safe; they have the bomb. India pointed out after we bombed Serbia to cover up BJ Clinton’s BJ that it was the reason they had the bomb.
We tend to look for less tech-savvy targets in our wars of political consideration.
It would be very unlikely to see the draft under a Republican President.
There was a time I’d be able to say under a Republican President OR a Republican controlled Congress BUT Obama has been ignoring Congress so I can no longer say that with Obama in the WH.
Democrats want the draft because they claim that today’s volunteer military puts more blacks in the battle field while “rich white men” stay home and enjoy life. Dems feel the draft is more fair to the poor and minority.
Say what?
Ubama needs a new war so he can get reelected. Of course, after America gets involved the spin will be that "America had no choice but to blah blah blah... nuclear weapons blah blah blah... so desperately tried to avoid blah blah..."
Iran. North Korea? The perfect patsies, right out of central casting.
Ubama's campaign strategy for the election eleven months from now is to send America into a fresh new war, becasue, see, Americans are very reluctant to dump a somber and serious "war time President". At least, that's the Democrats' theory.
Not from Obama.
One of the best ways for a dictator to stay in power it to unite his people against a common enemy. It is one of the most powerful propoganda campaigns in history - a powerful distraction from internal problems.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see an Obamunist war against some bad guy before the election.
Thanks for explaining.So do and your military friends have methods that would be best for protecting ourselves from Iran ? We could do it during the Cold War,we should be able to now. Granted, the Soviets and Red China didnt claim to be seeking martyrdom like Iran is. But even then, there;s the fact that Iranian govt would be unlikely be willing to destroy itself in a nuke war to get martyrdom for themselves; jihadists who claim towant martyrdom often really mean martyrdom for other people, not themselves.
The thing is, Iran’s military GDP is about the same as nations like Greece and Australia and is the lowest in the gulf region. ANd they have made virtually no offensive military actions against another nation in 30 years; the Iran Iraq war was basically initiated by Saddam Hussein. I dont see that Iran wants to use conventional military methods of destroying the West and Israel. I definitely think that Iran, like numerous other Islamic nations and terror groups, is seeking to use other methods to bring us down, so to speak, and so we need to find ways to defend ourselves accordingly.
Obama is totally cold blooded. He’ll do whatever will get him re-elected. He does not care about any human life.
No wartime president has ever lost a reelection. I’m sure that’s at least in the back of 0bama’s mind, and likely closer to the front.
I would say it will be either Iran, Pakistan or North Korea.
Whichever one he chooses to help him win in 2012 would most likely be the one which will have a post 2012 election outcome that does NOT benefit the United States. Obama has a pattern of creating wars or policies that end with us disadvantaged (ie Libya, Egypt, Honduras, Colombia, Iraq... the list goes on)
I’ve told friends for weeks that this could be an Obama October surprise. Hate to contemplate it, but I believe he is perfectly capable of it.
It is my opinion that Obama is slowly building this up to be an “October surprise.” He sinks the Iranian Navy and sends her subs to the bottom on a one way trip. The media will go wild that our President (not mine thank you) was forced to take this action against Iran to keep the straights of Hormuz open.
At the same time he could okay a military strike by and with Israel against Iran's nuclear facilities.
He has demonstrated that he is capable of this in Libya. 80 percent of those “NATO” aircraft were American. In Libya we threw out an odious and evil murderer that posed NO THREAT TO THE WEST. In Libya we now have odious and evil murders in power (muesli brotherhood) that ARE A THREAT TO THE WEST.
Obama knew this would happen in Libya just as it did in Egypt. There can be only one explanation for this. He hates his own country of which he is President. He wants to harm us.
Many people on this site think of Obama as immoral and others think of him as amoral. He is neither. He is a dedicated Marxist and thus all of his actions are perfectly predictable and logical from a Marxist philosophic point of view.
typo, muesli brotherhood = Muslim Brotherhood
You, my friend, win the cigar.
This fits hand-in-golve with denying the Keystone Pipeline, which will continue to keep crude/fuel prices up.
That way, an end to Iranian saber rattling would relax prices somewhat, perhaps with an internal regime change, and make him out to be some sort of hero (well, that's how the MSM would play it, despite him keeping prices up with his policies).
Unless the Iranians have an 'October surprise' of their own. Then, all hell will break loose.
“But I often wonder exactly what he is willing to do to improve his reelection chances. “
Repeal Obamacare? End regulations and allow the keystone pipeline to go through? There are just so many things he could do.
I don't see this part happening. Obama would fight against Israel before he'd fight with them. IMO
Good point. He could sell his masters an attack on Iran as helping the Guardians of the Shrine Cities fight off the apostatic Shiite menace.
Now ..... what to tell the barking moonbats of the Left? They'd go nuts. He'd have to do a Lincoln, maneuver Dinnerjacket into striking, say, a US carrier, to kick things off. He'd take a big hit, in order to take the moral high ground of "righteously indignant" and "more in sorrow than...." etc., etc., etc.
I disagree. By attacking Iran he could consolidate the "normally democrat vote" of the Jewish faith. Once reelected he could return to selling Israel down the river as usual.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.