Thanks for the war. Love, Iran

Is Bush really as stupid as he appears?

He must be.

"I say to Bush: `Thank you,"' quipped Intelligence Minister Ali Yunesi. "He motivated people to vote in retaliation."

The sharp barbs from President Bush were widely seen in Iran as damaging to pro-reform groups because the comments appeared to have boosted turnout among hard-liners in Friday's election...

The president's words sounded too much like the prewar rhetoric against Saddam, and many on-the-fence voters were shocked into action, said Abdollah Momeni, a political affairs expert at Tehran University. “People faced a dilemma,” Mr. Momeni said. “In people's minds it became a choice between voting or giving Bush an excuse to attack.”

My real question after the fold.

Do you think that maybe Bush's earpiece told him exactly what to say to stir up the hardliners in Iran?

Then Condi and (recess appointed) Bolton do their worst to cooperate with diplomatic overtures from the Iranian government.

(Bush in a future press conference)"We don't want to go to war... but ya see, these mullahs and jihadists and such just don't give us much choice...and gosh darn it, they just won't tell us the truth about those nukular weapons we know they have pointed at us."

Am I too far off the mark here?

If the past 5 years were some kind of mini series... this set-up really seems like a perfect next season.

R

From the fool's gold mouthpiece
The hollow horn plays wasted words

 

•  Lemme see here... what's this button do?

  It's been a while since I wrote a diary... I've been spending a LOT of time over here trying to bang a gong on a thread that I started a couple of weeks back.

  It's weird going to boards where everyone is spouting the Bush talking points. Scary, too.

  R

  by Randular on Sun Jun 19, 2005 at 08:41:28 PM PDT

•  Where's the poll with this diary?

  Bush's incompetence in foreign policy was foreshadowed when he couldn't name the Pakistani president during the campaign.

  Anyone else remember when Bush warned Syria not to allow any "Bathists" into the country? I mean he really did NOT know that Syria was under Ba'ath Party rule. As if his father had warned China not to allow any Communists into the country.

  Under Bush pere and Clinton our worst nightmare in Iraq was a Shi'ite theocracy allied with Iran. Now under Bush fils it's our best option. Ayatollah Sistani plans on us handing Iraq over to him. What's the choice? Civil War with us in the middle? That's a real possibility now. Civil War without us? Great, then the alternative to Shi'ite theocracy is al-Qa'ida theocracy. Invading Iran? Please, we have enough problems with Iraq.

  Not to mention the economy. The US is going down the tubes, and those of us who try to point it out and stop it are reviled as traitors. What a country!

  by Danjuma on Sun Jun 19, 2005 at 08:51:51 PM PDT

  •  Yep

    Bush manuvering behind the scenes to create the very briar shrub he wanted to be faced with?  Nope, just don't believe it.

    I still haven't made up my mind if they are just grown children with absolutely no clue what they are doing, like having a Fox news poll deciding foreign policy or are they shrewdly playing a game within a game within a game?

    Iran is going to become liberal if we just leave it the hell alone.  If we attack them, it will radicalize and unite the country and probably a large part of the middle east.  Since we won't have a draft, the military will be stretched super thin allowing chaos to erupt in Iraq.

    I honestly think the game is sell "defending America" to the masses, sieze the oil and screw China to the higher up neocons, and the final game is darkly cynical.  Slide the ME into chaos in the short run, preserving the oil in the ground for later profiteering after peak oil and in the short term providing massive incomes for war profiteers.

    Either that or they are just dumbasses who know as much about foreign policy as the carpet they walk on.

    by Michaelpb on Sun Jun 19, 2005 at 09:26:07 PM PDT