So, where was the October attack on Iran?

[Chomp]

Many of you will remember the slew of posts in recent months asserting that there would be some kind of miltary attack on Iran in October. Opinions as to the nature of that attack ranged from airstrikes to invasion.

I posted in several of these threads that I thought an October attack on Iran was utterly impossible for myriad strategic, financial, political and logistical reasons.

These posts were met with howls of derision from some: how could I be so naive to think "they" cared about politics or money or whatever?! You naive fool, they shrieked!



So, where was it? What happened to the October attack on Iran?

[The Straight Story]

1. It was slated to start in 24 business hours :) (nt)

[pooja]

2. possibly delayed... hopefully never happening.

[bluestateguy]

3. I'm a trifle deaf in this ear. Speak a little louder next time.

nt

[Mojambo]

4. I thought airstrikes were possible, even probable

But once war fatigue reached critical levels here at home they couldn't even get away with that.

[Webster Green]

11. Yep..

Exactly!

[Dangerously Amused]

5. You misunderstood.

It's going to be NEXT October.


Stay tuned...

[enid602]

6. Iran postponed

You must have been out of the country this past Tuesday.

[treestar]

7. Even the neocons and Rove must have realized it would not

work this time - apparently they thought the 911 and war fever would go on forever. They finally must have realized that an attack on yet another country this time would not rally the voters on terra, terra, terra and war, war, war.

[Captain Hilts]

8. Enterprise rotated back to Norfolk, on schedule, I guess. It's routine. nt

[meisje]

9. It's having a drink with the stock market crash and the depression of 2005

[nofurylike]

10. i am extremely grateful to have been wrong. eom

[A-Schwarzenegger]

12. Same place as Osama's corpsicle.

[readmoreoften]

13. It looks like it's still gearing up. A pre-election bombing was only one possibility.

People started saying that we were going to go to war with Iraq in 2001. That took two years. Iran very well may still be on the table.


http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-11-02T134337Z_01_BLA221126_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAN-MANOEUVRES.xml&src=rss

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20061105&articleId=3713

[daleo]

14. You're right, it didn't happen

But that doesn't mean people were wrong to sound an alarm about the possibility. Perhaps that's one reason it didn't happen.

[onenote]

15. reality rears its ugly head

to the dismay of the fantasy wing of DU

[readmoreoften]

17. Yeah, and I bet the PATRIOT ACT, the MCA, and the REAL ID ACT

are all concoctions of the "fantasy wing" as well. Frankly, I have a richer imagination than the neo-conservatives do. But I have to say that it's pretty disgusting to insinuate that a "wing" of DU wants disaster to happen. Kind of sounds like that "Democrats are on the side of the terrorists" rhetoric to me....

[onenote]

18. excuse me, but what does that have to do with the "Iran" surprise?

logic much? How does pointing out that it was unlikely in the extreme that there would be an attack on Iran in October translate into the idea that anyone wanted a disaster?

Good lord.

[readmoreoften]

21. Because an attack on Iran is about as "fantastic" as those other actions by our government.

One doesn't need to be an irrational dreamer to see that we might go to war with Iran in the very near future. I don't think "October" was ever the point. Don't you think it's kind of offensive to accuse Democrats of wishing a disaster on the US, when all they're trying to do is figure out a rotten regime's next move?

[onenote]

22. actually not, as reality demonstrates

the others are real. the attack on iran in October wasn't. And yes, the point was that it would occur before the election as an OCtober surprise. Stop with the strawman arguments, okay? (And I still don't see anyone accusing Demcorats of wishing a disaster on the US. All I saw was people saying that people predicting an october attack on iran were wrong to think it would happen, not that they wanted it to happen or wanted it to fail).

[readmoreoften]

25. "reality rears its ugly head to the dismay of the fantasy wing of DU"

Why would anyone who feared an October attack be "dismayed" that it didn't happen. I think relieved is more accurate. So is anyone who is afraid of the neo-conservative wing of our government launching an attack on Iran still "a fantasizer" What other things should I assume Bush isn't capable of?

It's not a strawman argument at all. The point is, it is not ridiculous to think that the Bush Administration is capable of acting upon wild, irrational fantasies based on faulty or contrived information in order to achieve a political gain.

[onenote]

27. dismay that they were wrong,not that it didn't happen

I don't think anyone claiming there would be an October surprise attack on iran wanted it to happen. but many took great offense when it was pointed out that their fear was not grounded in reality-- as history has shown to be the case, since the october surprise that some so confidently declared would happen didn't occur.

[readmoreoften]

28. How can a surprise be "grounded in reality"?

That's the whole "surprise" part, isn't it? I didn't see a single poster "confidently declare" that it WOULD happen, only that it very well might happen according to certain people in the military, even people who had spoke on CNN. I don't think bombing Iran is something people mind being wrong about. Frankly, I'm not certain that it's not going to happen. It may. It may not. No one knows. Regardless, if it looks like it might happen we all have a duty to speak out against it.

[onenote]

29. this poster sounded pretty confident...and he/she wasn't the only one

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=2195016

[readmoreoften]

32. S/he seems afraid it's going to happen. Not belligerent about it.

"The ONLY defense we have against this is to be screaming it from the rooftops everywhere just what they are in the process of doing before its too late. If we can take away the surprise effect we can possibly mitigate this."

How do you know his or her efforts didn't mitigate such an event? Most likely not, but you don't know. None of us know how any of this is going to unfold. To relegate all fears about the plans of the neo-conservative to a "fantasy" realm underestimates what the enemy is capable of-- the enemy being the neo-conservative movement. There's nothing insane about being suspicious of this administration.

The problem isn't one of "fantasy DUers" it's a crisis of information. The media has been so embedded with the Bush Presidency over the past 6 years that no one knows where to cull their information. That's the problem.

[TheWraith]

39. It's a commentary on the high degree of paranoia present on DU.

The problem isn't reality, it's the slant put on reality by DUers. There are times when thread after thread is cranked out of this place, filled with some of the most ridiculous supposition, assumptions, and just plain paranoia that you'll ever find. Take for instance the huge number of people who took at face value a report about the military covering up 300 dead in the destruction of the ammo dump at Camp Falcon--despite the fact that the report came from a Islamic militant propaganda website which has never printed one single accurate thing in its history, and the fact that that number was surrounded by various other extremely specious claims, AND against the expertise of people versed in ammo dump design who repeatedly mentioned that these dumps are designed to blow up safely, without killing anyone.

This is just one example where some people here seem to feel like the current situation isn't bad enough, it has to be worse than it appears. Hence the supposed Iran attack (a rumor which has come up every few months for three years, particularly before elections), the ideas about hidden Iraq war casualties, the absolute guarantees that were being thrown around every five minutes before the election that it was going to be stolen, etcetera, etcetera.

[onenote]

47. exactly right

[LordLovesAWorkingMan]

24. "Fantasy" being the operative word

It was seeming to me that some here wanted an attack on Iran to fuel their indignation, as though there wasn't already enough to be pissed about.

I think an attack on Iran is totally off the table now. The Dem victory already ensured that.

[alittlelark]

16. The US Generals revolted. They made it CRYSTAL clear

that they had NO FAITH. The timing of the editorials tells you all you need to know - they wanted these corporatists OUT OF POWER. They got their wish.

[alcibiades_mystery]

19. People exaggerate and make up crazy scenarios

It's common on any board. The October attack on Iran is in the back of the closet with the election machines that flip votes. All nonsense.

[Leopolds Ghost]

30. Attack on Iran and Election Machine Fraud "both nonsense"?

Why do folks take straw man arguments like "Iran was an October Surprise"?

I posted before the election that the folks who thought an attack would occur in October were obviously off-base.

They were using recycled info from last summer, when military folks were publically saying they had - at least temporarily - averted such an attack.

However you are wrong to believe that Bush/Cheney has not struggled for two YEARS now to put Iran on the table. Events conspired against them.

It has nothing to do with the election at all.

[DivinBreuvage]

20. God only knows what goes on behind the scenes up there

Almost all of us like to believe certain comforting things about the functioning of our republican government (I mean "republican" in the sense of government by representatives of the people, rather than by monarchs or autocrats) but I suspect that for a long time now much of the real power there has been operating behind sealed doors with the dark ruthlessness commonly associated with Borgias, Byzantines, and the like (but in reality characteristic of nearly every government on record).

[Ignacio Upton]

23. It was never a plan

I don't they would be that stupid...especially since oil prices would go through the roof, and falling oil prices were one of the only things Bush had going for him.

[PATRICK]

26. They played it safe

thinking to intimidate and actually repeat the easy win of 2002. It became apparent that the fun and games would start- if ever- after a GOP victory. The opposition of the military, other unfavorable factors such as israeli weakness in Lebanon. The last scandals that rocked the GOP. One can speculate about a desperate act that never happened after ALL the GOP strategies, still working somewhat, as a whole and in each part fizzled. Fortunately they never knew how bad off they were and did not really want the work and risk of doing anything new in the particular fizzle of their trying to calm Iraq(and our own military) in the Fall.

So in part, and thank God, there never was a pre-election attack plan, nor a "pretext plan that was workable, nor an Israeli action that was feasible. They were ready and provoking possibilities, but in large part treated this fall as a repeat of yesteryear, resting on the tried and true, on the laurels and the fact that everything seemed to be working- just not very well. Even had they had a crystal ball this over-confidence and habit was set in deep and the Dem response seemed predictable and wanting.

So, in retrospect, the Iran assault fell between overconfidence of the Roves and the mystery of the predictable Dem power as something that simply could not be committed to. Too hard for an incompetently run Pentagon and a military filled with critics. Too hard for the 100% political hacks trying to gleefully play their easy tricks once more.

Now lives will be saved, the "reports" and provocations will be rolled back by sheer legislative process. Iran was merely a bluff distraction, a forward offensive thrust of the chin and all too impossible as a practical strategy. It seems the divisions upstairs played a hand in that Rumsfeld so quickly fell. THAT seemed more pre-planned than any Iran invasion. The death of the neo-con empire(temporarily) seemed to be the November surprise whether the bluff succeeded or was called. Mostly due to the disaster in Iraq. Desperate acts likely were off the table as a harrowing lose/lose situation. In hindsight, the forces for peace had already won and insanity has lost its day.

[Leopolds Ghost]

31. I nominate this for Best Reply of the day. n/t

[JackBeck]

33. Thank God it didn't happen after we sent a fleet there.

And thank gawd our presence didn't provoke a response that involved causalities.

Have you forgotten what happened in the press during the lead up to our elections?

Iran and United States War Games.

Not gonna do the research for you. But look for the articles yourself.

[LeftCoast]

34. They decided they'd rather steal the election

D'oh!

[JackBeck]

36. Isn't scary how close the last few elections were?

And we finally got enough people out to the polls to vote in order to make sure we came out on top?

[T Town Jake]

35. Only in the minds of the loonies did such a thing....

...ever exist in the first place. And most of them are only here to make DU'ers look bad.

[TheBaldyMan]

37. There are sporadic OMG! IRAN! PANIC! posts here at DU.

mostly I avoid them, I get tired of laying out the same reasons again and again why an attack won't happen.

[TheWraith]

41. Amen.

[Zynx]

38. Ask Scott Ritter. eom

[oblivious]

40. BBC Intl has a special on Israel-Iran now saying an Israeli attack is nearly inevitable.

Interviewing former prime ministers, air force chiefs, etc.

[oblivious]

42. Thank Hezbollah.

William R. Polk, History News Network:

...The Israeli bombardment of Lebanon has been regarded as a test. Seymour Hersh reported in The New Yorker talks he had with current and retired American military and intelligence experts who told him that it was regarded as “a prelude to a potential American preemptive attack to destroy Iran’s nuclear installations.” They did terrible damage and killed many people, but they failed to accomplish their mission. As Bush’s former Deputy of State Richard Armitage said, “If the most dominant military force in the region – the Israel Defense Forces – can’t pacify a country like Lebanon, with a population of four million, you should think carefully about taking that template to Iran, with strategic depth and a population of seventy million…The only thing that the bombing has achieved so far is to unite the population against the Israelis.”

The Air Force plans have been resisted by the senior generals of the Army, Navy and Marine corps. In rare public statements and frequently in private, they have said that the plans are fatally flawed and that even if an invasion begins with aerial attack it will soon require ground troops. Despite the misgivings of the military professionals, Joseph Cirincione wrote in the March issue of Foreign Policy that conversations with senior officials in the Pentagon and the White House had convinced him that the decision for war had already been made...
http://hnn.us/articles/31051.html

[upi402]

43. and the generals n/t

[CJCRANE]

44. They were lazy.

In '04 the Osama videotape popped into their laps at the last minute and helped their GOTV (or at least they used that as part of the media "narrative" to explain the win).

This year they planned to use the same tactic with the Saddam verdict two days before the elections (co-opting Osama again would've been too predictable even for them).

Fortunately for us Foley, Haggard, Kerry's "stuck in Iraq" jibe and just plain ol' reality cancelled out any bounce that gave them.

[Selatius]

45. It was SPECULATION at best, at worst, it was fearmongering.

The only way war will happen is if the US accidentally blew up one of their civilian airliners like what happened in 1988.

[Dick Diver]

46. The same thing that happened to the October 2004 surprise

that the Mall of America was going to be nuked by * and the blame put on Bin Laden. This was a rumor pushed by a number of prominent DUers and, when some with a bit of rationality objected, they were banned.