wag-the-dog

amidst all the schadenfreude and the gloating and the glee of these days - the deep recesses of my ugly mind keep conjuring up background wag-the-dog scenarios... the most benign is another faux terra alert - olbermann recently pointed to 13 such faux alerts. the next worse is that the stupid fucking maladministration starts a new war. the drumbeat has been really loud (again) these last 2 weeks, although the noise has virtually been drowned out. the question hasnt changed in 2 years - who is next? syria or iran? iran or syria? the good news is that 'many' americans will recognize that for what it is. the bad news is that a 'terrorist' attack on US soil would probably wash away such concerns. and the really bad news is that i dont doubt that the war criminals in charge would hesitate to kill 2000 americans to save their ass. in fact - i have proof - they lied so that they could start a war for fun. im pretty sure that they dont give a damn about 150,000 dead iraqis, and the 2000 dead americans were apparently reasonable collateral damage - would they do it again? i dont doubt it.

the scariest thing is that if they started a new war now, nobody would believe their 'reasoning' - but if they did it after a 'terror' attack, then blinky's ratings would be in the 90's again. look at this graph again and ask yourself if it isnt karl rove's forbidden fruit.

with that in mind - consider the latest sabre-rattling against both iran and syria

* "Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on October 19, Condoleezza Rice was asked whether the Bush administration was planning military action against Syria. She answered, "I don't think the President ever takes any of his options off the table concerning anything to do with military force."
Last time we read the U.S. Constitution, the grave decision to use military force against another country was a matter for Congress to decide -- not an "option" for a President." (link)

* "There is little doubt John Bolton and the UK's maneuvering (about iran) at the UN is only serving as a silly ruse. The UN is already irrelevant when it comes to policing the United States imperial ventures, and he knows it. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was asked during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee on October 19, whether or not Bush was planning military action against Iran and Syria. Rice answered sternly, "I don't think the President ever takes any of his options off the table concerning anything to do with military force."
In the end, Bolton and the administration he represents will do what it wants. Even if it's war on Iran." (link)

ive long predicted a showdown between blinky and the armed forces - larry wilkerson last week predicted the same thing. its so fucking hot in the kitchen right now - its very very difficult to predict what will happen.

ive got my champagne on ice - and i wish that i had 72 or more virgins and kilos of coke - but these are still nervous times.

to be perfectly clear, the only reason a 'wag-the-dog' scenario might be 'better' than a 'terrorist' attack on amsoil is that ampublic is mostly capable of seeing through a dog-wagging. if the egadministration is as evil and as opportunistic and as desperate as they seem - then i fear they might try to exploit that - in which case, my concern isnt the comparative number of dead people, but the 'patriotic' cheering of the ampublic.

lets just hope they all go to jail quietly