WW III: Has the Rubicon been crossed?

[TechBear_Seattle]

Poll question: WW III: Has the Rubicon been crossed?

Under the laws of the old Roman Republic, it was death for a general to bring his legions into Italy proper. This was a measure meant to preserve the Republic against armed revolt by powerful military leaders who commanded the loyalty of the Republic's trained military. In 49 BCE, Julius Caesar broke that law when he brought his legions across the northern border, the river Rubicon. Once the first of his legions stepped on to the southern shore, Caesar was committed: either he would succeed in taking complete control of the Senate and the Republic it ruled, or he would die. Ever since, "crossing the Rubicon" has meant a single action that commits one to a course of action, with the only way out of the situation to survive following through.

One of the puzzles that historians work out is to find the Rubicon of wars and other major conflicts. Most historians consider the Rubicon of the American Revolution to be the French And Indian War, which ran (officially) from 1756 to 1763; it was the crippling debts from this war which prompted the British Parliament to institute the taxes which sparked the Revolution. Likewise the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand made World War I inevitable, and the humiliating terms of defeat laid on Germany after that war was the Rubicon that led to the rise of the Nazis and Adolph Hitler.

So, my question: Has the Rubicon of World War III been crossed? Has it become inevitable that a single war will once again envelope the planet? If so, who and what sparked it? If not, what can be done to prevent it?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. Not a "world war" but a world revolution against American imperialism.

We, like Imperial Rome, are bankrupting ourselves financially and morally, trying to keep the empire together against the efforts of the people of the client states to overthrow it.

It took a long time for the Roman Empire to fall. But, we're on a steep slope to the Imperial graveyard.

[leveymg]

2. Great question.

Deserves a full answer, but in short, no. Everything that's happened up until now with regard to Iran can be accounted for as part of an enormous psychological warfare operation intended to intimidate Iran into backing away from its nuclear weapons program.

So far, it's backfired.

If the UN Security Council imposes anything more than symbolic sanctions, however, the stage will be set for quick escalation into a bombing attack that ignites the general Middle-East war that everyone has feared.

We're almost to where the world was during the spring of 1914. Not quite there, yet, but uncomfortably close.

The fastest way to de-escalate would be to indict the Vice President and others around Bush who have been pushing this thing.

[TechBear_Seattle]

4. So Iraq is not a factor? Abu Graib? n/t

[leveymg]

6. Those events actually slowed the rush to war with Iran

Iraq was intended to be a staging operation and a display of "shock and awe". The outcome was a shocking display of awful political incompetence -- the US lost the war in Iraq on that day in April 2004 when the Abu Ghraib photios were released -- and the Iraqi resistance demonstrated the very real vulnerabilities of the US military machine. Now, everyone in the world knows exactly how to fight and defeat us. The Generals should have shot the neocons for this. Maybe, they still will.

I believe the Generals know that we can NOT win a conventional war in Iran right now, and that a bombing campaign would immediately escalate into a regional war we are not prepared to fight. They won't go along with the plan beyond a pysops campaign intended to destabilize Iran and slow down its assimilation of much of Iraq and its development of the bomb. Both of those developments are inevitable, and everyone knows it.

Perhaps a successor government to the Bush regime will deal with withdrawal on an adult basis.

[Tesha]

3. Not necessarily. We could still be back in the world's good graces by...

Not necessarily. We could still be back in the world's good graces
by overthrowing the Bush/neocon junta and working damned hard to make
amends.

Will we do that?

Don't count on it. In which case, yes, the Rubicon has been crossed
and it will eventually take military acton against the United States
(not nec. a world war, per se) to restore a nominal peace to the globe.

Tesha

[Uncle Joe]

5. With the corrupt/incompetent Bush/Cheney neocons in power,

I believe we are standing in the middle of the river with our waders on. The warrant less eavesdropping on Americans will be the deciding factor. If the congress and judiciary back down essentially stating the President is all powerful, above the law and not to be held accountable for his actions when clearly breaking the law and trashing the constitution, we have crossed the Rubicon.