when the skies are dark.
The next new moon is Feb. 17 -- so strikes could come as soon as the end of this coming week. The propaganda campaign has definitely been ramped up into high gear just in the past few days. Will it reach the peak required to provide cover for an Iran strike in just the next week? Possibly, although I suspect that they would prefer that there be an "incident" of some sort to set the attack in motion.
Can they manufacture the necessary "incident" in time for the February new moon? I don't think it's out of the realm of possibly. It could involve some significantly heinous event in Iraq -- what with the troop "surge" and the increased "clear and hold" operations in Baghdad, it won't be that difficult to point to some inevitable and particularily horrific flash point as being the fault of Iran.
Another possible scenario involves the two carrier groups now in place in the Persian Gulf (with a 3rd nearby placed on "short notice" alert) -- as well as the sundry minesweepers and other support craft that have also been deployed there. It's another kind of set-up for another sort of "incident". Nothing would actually
have to happen -- Gulf of Tonkin, anyone?
If we're looking at March instead next weekend, the new moon in March falls on Monday, March 19 -- 2 days before the Spring Equinox, perfect for "new beginnings". George & Laura will be traveling in South America from March 4 - 14. -- see this thread:
george and laura plan South American tour in March Just from the point of view of scriptwriting, what a lovely, emotionally jarring (as in throwing the U.S. public well and truly off-balance, and therefore unable to react coherently) sequence of events it would be for bush* to return to Washington to a huge (trumped up) crisis after a week and half of spreading his message of "democracy" in the southern hemisphere. He will, of course, have no choice but to "resolutely" "decide" to act.
Generally, April is seen as the
latest possible date for the attack on Iran to commence, by those who have been following these developments closely. There are some factors that argue against bush* waiting that long; among them the slight possibility that by then, enough Democrats in Congress will somehow muster up the courage to put up some legislation that forbids him from widening the war without specific Congressional approval. However, I don't plan on holding my breath for this.
Another factor that would seem to indicate sooner than April is the fact that Russian will be delivering its first shipment of nuclear fuel --
Russia vows to keep schedule for Iran nuclear plant -- to one of Iran's nuclear-powered electricity generating plants sometime in March. If bushco intends on striking that location, they really ought not to wait until there are actual nuclear materials there. Israel would be in the way of the radiation that would be released, and it seems unlikely that the neocon/Likud architects of bush*s ME policy would allow Israel to be so blatantly endangered.
And yet another factor is a possible mobilization of the international community to draw a line in the sand and unequivocally declaring that military aggression against Iran is unacceptable -- but, like our Congress, this (sadly) can not be counted upon.
This is what we are down to, folks. Either just a week (give or take a few days), or just a little over a month. If the war hasn't been started by April, there may yet be hope. Which is why bushco will want to get it on sooner rather than later.
sw