Obama on Iran, Israel and Nukes

[Razgovory]

I think Obama has pretty much no choice but to go with an attack.  If he struck some sort of deal with Iran, would Congress ratify it?  Would they fund any obligation the US makes?  Probably not.  It'll be North Korean Light Water reactor thing all over again.  Right now we are going through the motions.  The end game is in sight.  The covert war has been ratcheting up, which means the Israelis seem to think the Iranians are close.  I don't know if the Israelis have the ability to do more then one day worth of bombing.  It'll almost certainly require more then one day, so the US will probably have to the heavy lifting.

[Razgovory]

Why do we say the Mullahs are mad? Why is it assumed unreasoning, suicidal forces rule in Iran?

Cause they consider dynamite a fashion accessory?  Or that they use school children as disposable mine clearance devices?  And last year some idiot gave the go ahead to assassinate Saudi Ambassador on US soil.  This is reckless behavior that indicates to me that they really don't care how many of their people are killed to accomplish their goals.

[Sheilbh]

This is reckless behavior that indicates to me that they really don't care how many of their people are killed to accomplish their goals.

I'm not sure of the recklessness, unless you mean of other people's lives, and that doesn't necessarily indicate madness though. 

[Admiral Yi]

You always make the assumption that the Democrat will not use force.

I've made exactly one prediction so far: no attack on Iran.

I'd be happy to take your disability money if you want to put down a bet.

[Admiral Yi]

I don't think he is bluffing, because there is no upside to such a bluff, so why make it?

The upside to such a bluff is the same as with any bluff: the opponent folds.

[Berkut]

I don't think he is bluffing, because there is no upside to such a bluff, so why make it?

The upside to such a bluff is the same as with any bluff: the opponent folds.

But he is making the bluff to Israel - they are the target here, the intent is to get them to hold back. What is the upside to getting them to hold back, if there is no intention of going through with an attack on Iran should it become necessary?

If Obama has no intentin of taking military action should it become warranted, then why would he want to discourage Israel from taking that action?

I don't see any reason that makes sense unless you want to assume that Obama really does hate Israel and wouldn't mind seeing their position critically weakened.

[Razgovory]

You always make the assumption that the Democrat will not use force.

I've made exactly one prediction so far: no attack on Iran.

I'd be happy to take your disability money if you want to put down a bet.

You already owe me a foot rub.  Besides, how wide is the window for "no attack on Iran"?

[Hansmeister]

I don't think he is bluffing, because there is no upside to such a bluff, so why make it?

The upside to such a bluff is the same as with any bluff: the opponent folds.

But he is making the bluff to Israel - they are the target here, the intent is to get them to hold back. What is the upside to getting them to hold back, if there is no intention of going through with an attack on Iran should it become necessary?

If Obama has no intentin of taking military action should it become warranted, then why would he want to discourage Israel from taking that action?

I don't see any reason that makes sense unless you want to assume that Obama really does hate Israel and wouldn't mind seeing their position critically weakened.

Obama is afraid that an attack by Israel would cause a persian gulf crisis that would have oil prices going through the roof, sinking his already slim reelection chance.  Bluffing Israel into inaction until after the election makes perfect sense to Obama.

[Berkut]

I don't think he is bluffing, because there is no upside to such a bluff, so why make it?

The upside to such a bluff is the same as with any bluff: the opponent folds.

But he is making the bluff to Israel - they are the target here, the intent is to get them to hold back. What is the upside to getting them to hold back, if there is no intention of going through with an attack on Iran should it become necessary?

If Obama has no intentin of taking military action should it become warranted, then why would he want to discourage Israel from taking that action?

I don't see any reason that makes sense unless you want to assume that Obama really does hate Israel and wouldn't mind seeing their position critically weakened.

Obama is afraid that an attack by Israel would cause a persian gulf crisis that would have oil prices going through the roof, sinking his already slim reelection chance.  Bluffing Israel into inaction until after the election makes perfect sense to Obama.

Partisan bullshit.

[Razgovory]

This is reckless behavior that indicates to me that they really don't care how many of their people are killed to accomplish their goals.

I'm not sure of the recklessness, unless you mean of other people's lives, and that doesn't necessarily indicate madness though.

The assassination attempt was extremely reckless.  That's how wars get started.  Their efforts against the Israelis in India and Georgia have shown incompetence (which scary on it's own).  A country that lionizes people who kill themselves to harm their enemies are bit on the kooky side.  This kind of mindset often works its way up.   Take Japan in WWII.  This was a country that essentially committed suicide.  The fact they are irrational or at least have irrational elements in their slipshod government is enough to keep them from having nukes.  There are several other reasons that Obama touched on.  Anyone one of these is sufficient.

Personally I've lost hope in a peaceful solution after the Iranian government put down those protests a few year back.  We heard how how the youth in the country was anti-Tehran and we didn't want to alienate them.  What ever their feelings are, they don't have the power to effect change.

I'm predicting that we'll see how the new sanctions work for a few months but toward the end of the summer overt violence will breakout.  God only knows what happens then.  Hopefully it won't lead to full scale war, but that's a risk that must be taken.

The biggest problem is that Iran actually does have good reason to have nukes.  They can't be bullied, and nobody can touch them if they have nuclear weapons.  They also have major trump card in regional politics.  On the other hand, the US has a very good reason to not want Iran to have the weapons.  In a sense both sides are acting in their own best interest.  That's the key ingredient of a war.

[Razgovory]

Obama is afraid that an attack by Israel would cause a persian gulf crisis that would have oil prices going through the roof, sinking his already slim reelection chance.  Bluffing Israel into inaction until after the election makes perfect sense to Obama.

What was Bush's approval rating at the beginning of the Iraq war?

[The Brain]

Has Obama promised that Iran has WMDs yet?

[Martinus]

I don't think he is bluffing, because there is no upside to such a bluff, so why make it?

The upside to such a bluff is the same as with any bluff: the opponent folds.

But he is making the bluff to Israel - they are the target here, the intent is to get them to hold back. What is the upside to getting them to hold back, if there is no intention of going through with an attack on Iran should it become necessary?

If Obama has no intentin of taking military action should it become warranted, then why would he want to discourage Israel from taking that action?

I don't see any reason that makes sense unless you want to assume that Obama really does hate Israel and wouldn't mind seeing their position critically weakened.

Obama is afraid that an attack by Israel would cause a persian gulf crisis that would have oil prices going through the roof, sinking his already slim reelection chance.  Bluffing Israel into inaction until after the election makes perfect sense to Obama.

Partisan bullshit.

Hey, if a fatso with a squeaky voice says so, it must be true.

Btw, what's up with Republicans being fat, ugly and sounding like bitches? I mean, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Karl Rove, Hansmeister. They all look like they must have been really bullied at school. Does this victimization create future Republicans or are they picked on because already there is something wrong with them during their early years and other kids see that?

[Hansmeister]

I don't think he is bluffing, because there is no upside to such a bluff, so why make it?

The upside to such a bluff is the same as with any bluff: the opponent folds.

But he is making the bluff to Israel - they are the target here, the intent is to get them to hold back. What is the upside to getting them to hold back, if there is no intention of going through with an attack on Iran should it become necessary?

If Obama has no intentin of taking military action should it become warranted, then why would he want to discourage Israel from taking that action?

I don't see any reason that makes sense unless you want to assume that Obama really does hate Israel and wouldn't mind seeing their position critically weakened.

Obama is afraid that an attack by Israel would cause a persian gulf crisis that would have oil prices going through the roof, sinking his already slim reelection chance.  Bluffing Israel into inaction until after the election makes perfect sense to Obama.

Partisan bullshit.

You can't argue with that logical reasoning.

Btw, I'm not a partisan, I'm an ideologue, there is a big difference between the two.

[Berkut]

I don't think he is bluffing, because there is no upside to such a bluff, so why make it?

The upside to such a bluff is the same as with any bluff: the opponent folds.

But he is making the bluff to Israel - they are the target here, the intent is to get them to hold back. What is the upside to getting them to hold back, if there is no intention of going through with an attack on Iran should it become necessary?

If Obama has no intentin of taking military action should it become warranted, then why would he want to discourage Israel from taking that action?

I don't see any reason that makes sense unless you want to assume that Obama really does hate Israel and wouldn't mind seeing their position critically weakened.

Obama is afraid that an attack by Israel would cause a persian gulf crisis that would have oil prices going through the roof, sinking his already slim reelection chance.  Bluffing Israel into inaction until after the election makes perfect sense to Obama.

Partisan bullshit.

You can't argue with that logical reasoning.

It isn't logical reasoning, it is recognizing that logical reasoning won't do any good, because you are a partisan.

And your right, there really isn't any arguing with it.