A New War is the Only Way for Bush* to Win.

[spanone]

Iraq. And we're being set up right now. This will blow away the 911 Commission report. Take the election totally out of the news, if not postpone it. Relieve any pressure on the administration to explain Iraq or Afghanistan, guaranteeing Bushco* four more years. God help us - I hope I'm wrong.

[Fenris]

1. Who's he gonna send in - the League of Women Voters?

He's got no soldiers.


But he can make some, can't he?

[Nevernose]

5. He doesn't need soldiers

A few airstrikes to initiate a new cold war (more of a lukewarm war, really). Perhaps a nuke or nukes afterwards.

[calico1]

6. That's what I was thinking.

He can't get approval for reinstatement of the draft, train and draft new people before the elections. Not enough time. And there just aren't enough volunteers. We are stretched to the limit as it is, and I don't see any way of getting foregin support since everyone, including our allies, hate us now.

[indigobusiness]

10. He'd better send in the League of Women Voters...

They are an unruly bunch and they will kick his ass for starting another war. Best to ship 'em out. Good call.

[asjr]

2. I hope you are wrong also, but with the latest

spin coming out by Repubs and the media about the Iraq-Uranium claims being correct and Wilson being a liar and now trying to connect Iran with 9/11, how do we refute it? I wish Rockefeller would come right out NOW and say what he believes is true. I am sick and tired of being sick and tired of all this BS. And enough people will believe the Repubs that the tide may turn. The new quick vote on CNN says about half the people believe Iran had something to do with 9/11.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

3. I hope you are wrong too

but how freaking long can they keep up air strikes? I mean geez, we got no spare soldiers unless they start signing up freepers and that's when we suddenly get a new influx of registered Dems!

So what, he's gonna keep up air bombing raids from now until mid-November???

I hope you are wrong, too, I really do.

[spanone]

9. He could say we won Iraq and put the soldiers in Iran.

You can't apply logic to these bastards. This is about BILLIONS AND BILLIONS AND BILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

[kikiek]

4. I fear you're right. He has said you don't change presidents during a war.

[gristy]

7. I don't think he has the balls.

I don't think any of them do. Rumsfeld truely believed (and said) that Iraq would "be a cakewalk". Well, his eyes are not deceiving him, and he realizes now that it isn't.

These pieces of shit are not going to be invading anybody anytime soon.

[indigobusiness]

11. Balls? He don't need no stinkin' balls...He's got

Jeeesus.

[AlinPA]

8. I believe it would bring him down further in polls. Now, if he picked

Powell as VP running mate, he might win. Most here say that won't happen.

[Tamyrlin79]

12. I agree

Starting a war before the election would not be very helpful to them. However, setting up the platform for another war *after* the election makes a lot of sense, considering the plans to revive the draft. The two go hand in hand. This way, though, they can talk tough and look strong on Iran (and the War on Terra) up to the elections.

[misanthrope]

13. He doesn't need it...

...he didn't last time. He had "other methods" of securing votes. Why should 2004 be any different?