home

October Surprise: War With Iran?

Former Senator Gary Hart, writing at Huffington Post today, opines that the October surprise may be that Bush launches a pre-emptive war against Iran before the November elections.

The steps will be these: Air Force tankers will be deployed to fuel B-2 bombers, Navy cruise missile ships will be positioned at strategic points in the northern Indian Ocean and perhaps the Persian Gulf, unmanned drones will collect target data, and commando teams will refine those data. The latter two steps are already being taken.

Then the president will speak on national television. He will say this: Iran is determined to develop nuclear weapons; if this happens, the entire region will go nuclear; our diplomatic efforts to prevent this have failed; Iran is offering a haven to known al Qaeda leaders; the fate of our ally Israel is at stake; Iran persists in supporting terrorism, including in Iraq; and sanctions will have no affect (and besides they are for sissies). He will not say: ...and besides, we need the oil.

What will be the consequences? Hart writes,

....violent reaction throughout the Islamic world; a dramatic increase in jihadist attacks in European capitals and the U.S.; radicalization of Islamic youth behind a new generation of jihadist leaders; consolidation of support for Hamas, Hezbollah, al Qaeda, and a rapidly spreading malignant network; escalating expansion of anti-American sentiment throughout the world, including the democratic world; and the formation of WWIII battle lines between the U.S. and the Arab and Islamic worlds.

How likely is this? Hart says "the authors of the war on Iraq have "regime change" in mind in Iran ."

For a divinely guided president who imagines himself to be a latter day Winston Churchill (albeit lacking the ability to formulate intelligent sentences), and who professedly does not care about public opinion at home or abroad, anything is possible, and dwindling days in power may be seen as making the most apocalyptic actions necessary.

< Specter Defends Habeas (For Now) | The Hell With the Law >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#1)
    by Darryl Pearce on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 06:20:50 PM EST
    ...I can't worry about that right now. My bank with which I have the E-LOC is charging me $10 for nothing. ...oh, wait! We have an election coming up? Right now, I'm a yellow-dog democrat, thanks!

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 06:20:50 PM EST
    My biggest question is why? He knows his attempt to remake the middle east was a bust. He knows that the people are against the war. He knows congress won't give him approval. So, why this need to get into another war while we are busted, no equipment and no troops???

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#3)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 06:20:50 PM EST
    I think you ought get on board with this one. After all, there are all the other October surprises which left you looking foolish and grateful that nobody pays attention to you. 'cause if they had, they'd remember. That could be embarrassing.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 06:42:34 PM EST
    I refuse to believe that this is at all likely, if only because it would open a Pandora's Box so horrific that even people as simple-minded as The Bush League know it's a bridge too far. Think about it; REALLY think about it. If you think the U.S. is really fighting a war in it's pathetic little "WOT", then just imagine the kind of REAL war that this sort of unprovoked invasion would elicit. Imagine trying to extinguish a fire by throwing rocket fuel on it. The U.S. would then have created an international guerilla war against itself, on ALL fronts throughout the world, with extensive use of asymmetric warfare. NO ONE ANYWHERE WOULD BE SAFE ANYMORE. The world would effectively become a shooting gallery. Air travel would become a game of Russian Roulette. And the world would be armed to the teeth (even more so than it already is). And, of course, how far away would the fascist police state be then? Ubiquitous terror requires ubiquitous security. Ubiquitous security requires defunct liberty. Game over: the "terrorists" won. The New World Order would then be what we all suspected it was: nothing more than the Brave New World.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#10)
    by Johnny on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 09:17:25 PM EST
    I think Dubya's power is gone after November. After his pathetic little whine-session on pre-empted TV a few weeks ago... I can't believe people voted for this schmuck. What a bunch of deluded fools... Sad, really.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 09:17:25 PM EST
    Study calls Iran 'biggest beneficiary' of US war on terror
    Two new reports criticize the US's handling of Iran, just as the West gauges Iran's response to a proposal meant to rein in Tehran's nuclear ambitions. One report says the US war on terror has strengthened Tehran, the other slams America's poor intelligence on Iran.
    He just might do it though. All of his attempts lately to bolster support for his wot have failed miserably. The guy is insane. And desperate. ---edger

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#12)
    by MiddleOfTheRoad on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 09:17:25 PM EST
    Coming after Iraq, I doubt if this will work.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 09:17:25 PM EST
    Study calls Iran 'biggest beneficiary' of US war on terror
    Two new reports criticize the US's handling of Iran, just as the West gauges Iran's response to a proposal meant to rein in Tehran's nuclear ambitions. One report says the US war on terror has strengthened Tehran, the other slams America's poor intelligence on Iran.
    He just might do it though. All of his attempts lately to bolster support for his wot have failed miserably. The guy is insane. And desperate. ---edger

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 09:17:26 PM EST
    This sounds perfectly fine to the sorts of people who make money on war and people suffering.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 09:17:26 PM EST
    Would it really be a surprise?

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#7)
    by jarober on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 09:17:26 PM EST
    "Besides, we need the oil"? Pray tell, if we executed bombing raids, and didn't try to acquire territory, how would that work? Given that such an attack would make oil traders nervous, oil futures would shoot way up - and consequently, the price of gas at the pump would go up (as it did after last year's hurricanes). TL has been predicting a draft for 5 years, and it hasn't happened. We are sending a handful (5) ships to the middle east, and TL sees an attack on Iran? File this under "completely paranoid and disabled by Bush Derangement Syndrome".

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#8)
    by Edger on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 09:17:26 PM EST
    Study calls Iran 'biggest beneficiary' of US war on terror
    Two new reports criticize the US's handling of Iran, just as the West gauges Iran's response to a proposal meant to rein in Tehran's nuclear ambitions. One report says the US war on terror has strengthened Tehran, the other slams America's poor intelligence on Iran.
    He just might do it though. All of his attempts lately to bolster support for his wot have failed miserably. The guy is insane. And desperate.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 09:17:26 PM EST
    I hope he does it. Let's just get this over with.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#15)
    by Che's Lounge on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 07:31:26 AM EST
    We will need some kind of "event" to occur first, in order to justify the attack.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 07:46:26 AM EST
    Larry C. Johnson of The Huffington Post argues that Republicans, particularly Vice President Dick Cheney, his former aide "Scooter" Libby, and White House advisor Karl Rove, were responsible for undermining CIA efforts to monitor Iran's nuclear activity by outing CIA operative Valerie Plame in an act of political retribution against her husband, Joseph C. Wilson. So, the Republicans want to whine about inadequate intelligence on Iran's nuclear program while holding fund raisers for Scooter Libby, one of the men implicated in the leak of Valerie's classified identity? Excuse me? The leak did more than ruin Val's ability to continue working as an undercover CIA officer. The leak destroyed a U.S. intelligence program to collect information about Iran's efforts to get nuclear weapons material. ---more
    ---edger

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 07:55:18 AM EST
    Sep 22, 2006 The surprising end of the New American Century:
    US Air Force Colonel Sam Gardiner, who taught strategy and military operations at the National War College and who just finished a paper entitled "Considering the US Military option for Iran," appeared on CNN this week and said: "The order has been given (to strike Iran) In fact, we've probably been executing operations for at least 18 months . . . I've talked to Iranians (and they tell me) we've captured some people who worked with them (American Special-Ops) We've confirmed they're there." Gardiner added that "US naval forces have been alerted for deployment. That's a major step . . . And the (battle) plan has been sent to the White House." The first phase of the war has already begun. The second phase, the bombing campaign, will undoubtedly follow a feeble pretext for initiating hostilities. Iran may be cited for its alleged nuclear weapons programs or Bush may simply claim the right to unilaterally enforce UN treaty violations, but these are just a formality. The decision to attack Iran was made long ago and features prominently in many of the neoconservative policy-documents including the Project for the New American Century and A Clean Break; a New Strategy for Securing the Realm. Iran cannot be allowed to develop nuclear technology for fear that it may provide them with the means to defend their oil. That would be catastrophic for Western elites who plan to oversee the distribution of the world's dwindling resources. White House hawks and their corporate colleagues realize that the only way to manage the explosive growth of America's greatest competitor, China, is by seizing its primary source of energy. The hand which controls the oil-spigot rules the world. Thus, Iran has become a strategic imperative for US plans of global domination. ... A war with Iran will produce hundreds of thousands of casualties, topple the superpower model of global rule and, very likely, bring an end to the new American century.
    Is the only way out of the nightmare of the bush presidency through another larger nightmare? ---edger

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 08:46:08 AM EST
    TL: You are starting to beat this meme more than the old Draft post you used to have. You wrote about this in May: May 11: Report: Aircraft Carriers headed towards Iran, possibly for airstrike Of course the carriers are being left out of Hart's scenario. They must not do any good in bombing campaigns. May 18: Pentagon sources confirm Iran strike plans Hart definately overlooked the Carriers.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#16)
    by desertswine on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 08:55:05 AM EST
    I think the only question is whether or not the Bushistas are crazy enough to use tactical nukes or not. I think... yes.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 08:55:05 AM EST
    Has any neocon considered the Iranian response to an American attack? In war games held some time ago the "Enemy" using suspected Iranian resources destroyed the US fleet of aircraft carriers and support vessels in a single attack with tiny vessels (many of them). Remember the damage done to the Cole by a rubber dingy in Yemen? It's all "lets get it over with" and "they must not get a nuclear weapon". They have no bomb and cannot make one for years if they wanted to. They have not attacked anyone for more than a hundred years. Is the US Bush regime insane? If so impeach them all. Reason enough I would think.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 08:55:05 AM EST
    The only thing scarier than this scenario is that you actually take it seriously. It's this kind of stuff that has kept the Left from winning the last three "referendums" on Bush. The public has to decide whether you are really serious about this, in which case you're obviously beyond the pale and cannot be trusted with leadership, or if you are not serious, in which case you can't even be bothered to make an honest argument for why you should be trusted with leadership and therefore cannot be. Bush has been a huge disappointment on so many levels that you should be able to offer something substantive, but all we get is the same tired conspiracy theories and the same stupid graphics, rehashed for those whose attention spans are shorter than the 30 minute news cycle on CNN. It almost makes you wonder if the DNC is paying for this site as a place to keep the loony left happy and out of their hair.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#22)
    by dalloway on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 10:45:45 AM EST
    Bush won't attack Iran before the election -- he'll do it afterwards. If Republicans retain control of Congress, they'll declare a state of national emergency, revoke most civil liberties and postpone (indefinitely) the 2008 elections. If Democrats take control of one or both houses and try to do anything to head off war with Iran or impeach Bush after he starts one without Congressional approval, Bush will declare martial law and have all the "traitors" arrested. This bunch won't give up power until it's pried from their cold dead hands!

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 10:46:19 AM EST
    Charel: Has any neocon considered the Iranian response to an American attack? In war games held some time ago the "Enemy" using suspected Iranian resources destroyed the US fleet of aircraft carriers and support vessels in a single attack with tiny vessels (many of them). Payvand's Iran News ... 1/23/06 What is the response of Iran to the U.S. or Israelis threat? By Hussein Sharifi
    "We have our sensors in place in the U.S., Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, and most Arab countries. We know ahead of the time when they are coming, and since Mr. Bush has given American democracy along with the preemptive strike as the right of everybody in the world, we are going to use it and use it effectively. We are present in most of the military briefings of the U.S. in Afghanistan and Iraq. As soon as we see that it is imminent we hit them and hit them hard... Whether the U.S. or Israel attacks us, we will consider it as Israeli attack since we know how much power they have over the U.S. political and decision-making system."
    Hussein Sharifi is a retired military officer who served in Iranian Imperial Army and Islamic republic army and now resides in the United States. ---edger

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#24)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 06:54:43 PM EST
    dalloway - You know, your comment needs to be put on the front page of all the nation's newspapers:
    b (Text)If Republicans retain control of Congress, they'll declare a state of national emergency, revoke most civil liberties and postpone (indefinitely) the 2008 elections.
    Headline: National Security Expert Predicts!! or Paranoia siezes another Leftie!! Charel - Are you for real?? The carriers would stand off too far for any such things to happen... I mean really... and to prove that you know absolutely nothing you write:
    They have not attacked anyone for more than a hundred years.
    Uh, have you ever heard of their attacking our embassies in December 1979? Holding our diplomats prisoner for over 400 days? Have you studied ANY history? Do you remember the Iran/Iraq war? You know, the one in which Iran perfected the technique of using children to clear mine fields by having them role on the ground in advance of the troops??? I mean, good heavens. How can you possibly not know these things? Have you been to school?? Read anything besides KOS and MoveOn??? Anon quotes:
    We are present in most of the military briefings of the U.S. in Afghanistan and Iraq.
    Yeah. Sure. We are going to brief the troops in Afghan and Iraq that we are attacking Iran. Pardon me while I snicker at such an idoitic threat. et al - In case you folks have missed this, Iran exports oil, but has to import gasoline and disel. What does that mean? One strike on their refineries and two days later they're on foot.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 07:34:20 PM EST
    Jimaka: Please. Iran did not attack Iraq in the Iran-Iraq War - Iraq did that, with U.S. bidding. As for the 1979 embassy ordeal, it was 444 days and while it technically was an attack (since embassies are effectively the soil of the country whose embassy it is), it was not an attack on another country (since it was within the country of Iran). Also, can you blame them? After extensive U.S. intervention in Iranian politics - ya know, like coups and installing dictators, fun stuff like that - you really can't count that. But, by all means, don't let facts get in the way. Meanwhile, the U.S.'s track record on attacking other countries is The Worst in the world. Seems we have a problem playing well with others.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#27)
    by Edger on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 10:32:29 PM EST
    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#26)
    by Edger on Tue Sep 26, 2006 at 12:25:44 AM EST
    War Games:
    The scenario was a US invasion of an unnamed Persian Gulf country (either Iraq or Iran). The US was testing a new hi-tech joint force doctrine, so naturally van Riper used every lo-tech trick he could think of to mess things up. When the Americans jammed his CCC network , he sent messages by motorbike. But that was just playing around. They wouldn't have minded that. Might've even congratulated van Ripen, bought him a drink for his smarts, at the post-games party. The truth is that van Ripen did something so important that I still can't believe the mainstream press hasn't made anything of it. With nothing more than a few "small boats and aircraft," van Ripen managed to sink most of the US fleet in the Persian Gulf. What this means is as simple and plain as a skull: every US Navy battle group, every one of those big fancy aircraft carriers we love, won't last one single day in combat against a serious enemy. The Navy brass tried to bluff it out, but they were pretty lame about it. They just declared the sunken ships "refloated" so the game could go on as planned. This is the kind of word-game that makes the military look so damn dumb. ... And the sickest part is that the admirals and the captains and the contractors all know it. Goddamn. Maybe we deserve what's gonna happen to us. Only thing is, it won't be the brass who die. It'll be the poor trusting kids on those carriers who'll die, the poor suckers who thought they'd get free training and a world tour, or even get the chance to "defend America." They'll die not even believing what's happening to them as the whole giant hulk starts cracking up and sliding into the water.


    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#28)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 26, 2006 at 06:44:00 AM EST
    Lav - Forgiving Iran for attacking our embassy? How Leftie of you.... I was starting to think better of you. Let me see. That pesky neighbor has been messing with me for years... I'll just invade his home and kidnap his children... As for the Iran-Iraq war, my view is that Iran was in the process of attacking. Then, as now, they saw themselves as the builder of an Empire. edger - Do you really believe that? This is so dumb on so many levels it is hard to pick a response..
    When the Americans jammed his CCC network , he sent messages by motorbike
    . Pure nonsense. Bicycles for messages over hundreds of miles when the attacking force is using mobile weapons? Games are games. Somewhere in there is the premise that we would be stupid enough to bring our ships close enough so that the light plans/motor boats could actually make an attack. Aint gonna happen. The attack will come from the sky from ships that are hundreds of miles away, far beyond the motorboats and bicylces you so naively speak of. And not in the "restrained" waters of the Persian Gulf.... And then we have those 14 airbases in Iraq.... ;-) As for your link. "War nerd" is an apt description.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#30)
    by Edger on Tue Sep 26, 2006 at 02:48:18 PM EST
    The attack will come from the sky from ships that are hundreds of miles away, far beyond the motorboats and bicylces you so naively speak of. And not in the "restrained" waters of the Persian Gulf.... So? They could use ICBM's out of North Dakota and risk no military assets. Except of course the troops in Iraq? Oh, right, them? And CentCom 34 miles across the water from Iran in Doha, Qatar. Oh, yeah... well, ummm... Umm, what? Float CentCom out to sea out of the range of small boats and cessnas from Iran. Sure... good plan. That's not the point. The Persian Gulf [...] is a 600-mile-long body of water which separates Iran from the Arabian Peninsula, and one of the most strategic waterways in the world due to its importance in world oil transportation. At its narrowest point (the Strait of Hormuz), the Gulf narrows to only 34 miles wide. OIL FLOWS - Strait of Hormuz
    In 2003, the vast majority (about 90%) of oil exported from the Persian Gulf transited by tanker through the Strait of Hormuz , located between Oman and Iran. The Strait consists of 2-mile wide channels for inbound and outbound tanker traffic, as well as a 2-mile wide buffer zone. Oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz account for roughly two-fifths of all world traded oil, and closure of the Strait of Hormuz would require use of longer alternate routes (if available) at increased transportation costs. Such routes include the approximately 5-million-bbl/d-capacity East-West Pipeline across Saudi Arabia to the port of Yanbu, and the Abqaiq-Yanbu natural gas liquids line across Saudi Arabia to the Red Sea. The 15.0-15.5 million bbl/d or so of oil which transit the Strait of Hormuz goes both eastwards to Asia (especially Japan, China, and India) and westwards (via the Suez Canal, the Sumed pipeline, and around the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa) to Western Europe and the United States.
    The strait and it's oil tanker traffic are siitting ducks for Iran's Guerilla Fleet. And those pipelines across Saudi Arabia? Well, even you can figure out what Iran will probably do to those with Shahab-3 missiles, or even with bomb belts. They can probably use camels to get to those pipelines, forget motorbikes. Matter of fact, they probably have people sitting right beside those pipelines right now, or have had radio detonatable mines buried in the sand under the pipelines for years. Of course, these things will be an October Surprise only to bush supporting warmongers.. The rest of the world knows quite well what the consequences for oil traffic and for the global economy of an attack on Iran will be. Think about it. Better buy some good hiking boots. Oh, and you can always use your car for a planter in the garden. War Games: The Navy brass tried to bluff it out, but they were pretty lame about it. They just declared the sunken ships "refloated" so the game could go on as planned. This is the kind of word-game that makes the military look so damn dumb.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Sep 26, 2006 at 02:48:19 PM EST
    The attack will come from the sky from ships that are hundreds of miles away, far beyond the motorboats and bicylces you so naively speak of. And not in the "restrained" waters of the Persian Gulf.... So? I see you're back shilling for the dems again with your example of rethuglicker intellectual (sic) capacity. The Persian Gulf [...] is a 600-mile-long body of water which separates Iran from the Arabian Peninsula, and one of the most strategic waterways in the world due to its importance in world oil transportation. At its narrowest point (the Strait of Hormuz), the Gulf narrows to only 34 miles wide. OIL FLOWS - Strait of Hormuz
    In 2003, the vast majority (about 90%) of oil exported from the Persian Gulf transited by tanker through the Strait of Hormuz , located between Oman and Iran. The Strait consists of 2-mile wide channels for inbound and outbound tanker traffic, as well as a 2-mile wide buffer zone. Oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz account for roughly two-fifths of all world traded oil, and closure of the Strait of Hormuz would require use of longer alternate routes (if available) at increased transportation costs. Such routes include the approximately 5-million-bbl/d-capacity East-West Pipeline across Saudi Arabia to the port of Yanbu, and the Abqaiq-Yanbu natural gas liquids line across Saudi Arabia to the Red Sea. The 15.0-15.5 million bbl/d or so of oil which transit the Strait of Hormuz goes both eastwards to Asia (especially Japan, China, and India) and westwards (via the Suez Canal, the Sumed pipeline, and around the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa) to Western Europe and the United States.
    The strait and it's oil tanker traffic are siitting ducks for Iran's Guerilla Fleet. And the piplines across Saudi Arabia? Well, even you can figure out what Iran will probably do to those with Shahab-3 missiles, or even with bomb belts. Of course, these things will be an October Surprise only to priapic wargasm starved bushlickers. The rest of the world knows quite well what the consequences for oil traffic and for the global economy of an attack on Iran will be. Better buy some good hiking boots. Oh, and you can always use your car for a planter in the garden. War Games: The Navy brass tried to bluff it out, but they were pretty lame about it. They just declared the sunken ships "refloated" so the game could go on as planned. This is the kind of word-game that makes the military look so damn dumb. ---edger

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#31)
    by Edger on Tue Sep 26, 2006 at 03:57:50 PM EST
    And then we have those 14 airbases in Iraq.... You're right. I completely forgot about those 14 bases and the troops in them, completely surrounded by people loyal to Iran... You're right. "War nerd" is an apt description.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#32)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 26, 2006 at 05:03:29 PM EST
    edger - The fact that the Gulf is narrow, etc., has been known for thousands of years. We wouldn't put our fleet into. Instead we would stand off and attack from a distance. Are you incapable of understanding that? As for the troops in Iraq, we would love for Iran to start an overland attack. Remember cluster bombs??? edger - Don't worry and be frightened. The military will take care of you.. even if they really don't want to.

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#33)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 26, 2006 at 05:07:37 PM EST
    edger writes:
    Hussein Sharifi is a retired military officer who served in Iranian Imperial Army and Islamic republic army and now resides in the United States.
    You do understand, don't you, that the Moslem forces haven't won't a war in what, 300 years?

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#34)
    by Edger on Tue Sep 26, 2006 at 09:13:03 PM EST
    ;-)

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#35)
    by Edger on Tue Sep 26, 2006 at 11:20:07 PM EST
    There really isn't a point you can't miss, is there Jim?

    Re: October Surprise: War With Iran? (none / 0) (#36)
    by Rich on Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 09:36:58 AM EST
    Read Daniel 11: 40-45 KJV