Buchanan On McLaughlin: Fifty-Fifty Chance We Bomb Iran By Fall

It was an otherwise normal day in the Land of the McLaughing Group. John got to bellow, "The answer is HILLARY." And nobody minded that they weren't as relentlessly dogmatic in the Papism as Pat Buchanan, and the whole panel kinda sorta agreed on the issue of China and the Olympics, but because this was the McLaughlin Group, they all agreed to pillory each other with loud sounds from their cakeholes for our amusement. But, about halfway through the show, Pat Buchanan said something that didn't amuse - not one little bit I'm afraid!

BUCHANAN: But I'll tell you what's coming, John. Petraeus pointed right at the special groups supported by Iran, as the main problem now. They are firing rockets into the Green Zone, they're responsible for Basra. The president said that Iran better not make the wrong choice. We're looking at 140,000 troops there by the end of the year, and very possibly airstrikes in Iran before this fall.

Oh. Fantastic.

[WATCH.]

Later, Pat went back to this scary imagining, predicting: "Fifty-fifty chance of U.S. airstrikes on Iran by October." Paging Dr. Strangelove!

Comments

[Beaux510]

When Pat keeps his own personal politics out of things and merely sticks to event analysis, he is usually dead on.

Last week I read a short paper he wrote about this very subject, albeit in more detail. What was surprising was it could have been posted right here on HuffPo and everyone would have been shocked at it's non-right demeanor. He lays out every point in the sequence of events from early saber-rattling to the Kyl/Lieberman Amendment (points out Hillary's support and vote for it), CENTCOM Admiral Fallon's resignation(vociferously opposed to Bushco's Iran plan) and just recently General Petraeus' testimony and affirmation of Iran's interference in Iraq.
He also states astonishment at how little attention is being given to the subject seeing as how Buishco is playing by the same rules they used to go into Iraq.

[biosolution]

Yeah, let"s bomb Iran for $10.00/gal gasoline. Gee, another neocon wingnut plan!

Iran ships approximately 4,000,000 million barrels of oil per day. Daily total world consumption is about 85,000,000 million barrels per day. The daily surplus or deficit (elasticity in the market) of world consumption is about 2,000,000 million barrels a day, or approximately 2% percent.

When we bomb Iran, some percentage of oil shipments will be halted either for political reasons or from the destruction of their producing and delivery systems. When that happens, and there is no elasticity in the market, oil prices will spike out of control. Industrialized nations will be pitted against each other scrambling for the limited supply.

Iraq"s supply is about 2% percent. Its precarious production has already caused a dramatic spike in the price of oil; but, of course the oil companies and the politicians will tell you otherwise.
There"s no way to tell what the price of oil would be with a 5% percent or even 2% percent in global supply loss, but $200-$300 dollars/barrel is easily conceivable. At those levels, the economic shock to the world"s industrial nations would be catastrophic.

Nations will have to fight for oil, because oil is to their economies, as air is to you. If you can"t breathe, you choke and then you die.

McCain sings, "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb..Iran", see and hear it at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg.

[Atef861]

The Democratic candidate with the courage to oppose Bush's war on Iran is the candidate who can beat McCain.

[WilPower]

Does anyone else find garbovatwins comments...interesting? Great advice whomever you are. Unfortunately, I think humanity is doomed. Instead of stating the obvious, do you have suggestions on what can be done?

[stepintothelight]

Just look at history people. The Neo-Cons are just the latest in a long line. Look at Iran geograpically. It is a fortress country for those of you familiar with military topographical strtegy. And Americans deserve to be the stuck in the quagmire if we beleive that a War with Iran will be a cakewalk. Many others before us have tried ... Many before have failed!!!

[josephjsalas]

Is it Iran firing rockets into the Green Zone or private contractors firing the rockets in order
to get us into another 100 years of debt?

[Amalek]

I think Pat and the neocons are just talking up an invasion of Iran by a country that actually has weapons of mass destruction so that they can provoke a preemptive, defensive attack by terrorists on the US that will get a republican back in the white house.

Twisted minds think in twisted ways.

[morbie5]

Pat Buchanan does not want to invade Iran just like he was against invading Iraq!!!!

[Reveille]

Once again an air strike is the answer to everything; as an air force veteran buddy of mine always says, "The USAF has the world's greatest PR Department." And suppose the Iranis don't like being bombed? I expect that the tenth-wits that told us that the Iraqis would welcome us as liberators will assure us that the Irani people all secretly love us and will rise up against the mullahs to support the people who just bombed their country and killed their citizens. Right. Such delusions have already cost us over 4000 dead in Iraq. And with what does the adminstration plan to use then? The Army and Marine generals repeatedly say that our land forces have been broken due to criminal misuse by Bushie's amateur war tactics. We have nothing left with which to fight. Perhaps it is time that the US Armed Forces, for the first time in history, tell a President,"No sir, we are not going to get our soldiers killed for your illisions."

[glesslib]

Yesterday I read that Cheney is probably trying to get Israel to bomb Iran as our surrogates. It's really not a stretch to think that Pat Buchanan reads the same stuff we do.

I gotta say I'm more than a little bored with the same old "talking heads" on every show. There's Pat, Ann Coulter, James Carville, Marlee Matlin, Bill Kristol, etc., etc, etc. All are quoted everywhere and, in my opinion, don't seem to have anymore expertise than a well-read man on the street. Their responses to most questions as so predictable that I can practically say them in unison with the speaker. Boring TV. The networks would be smart to bring in a few new faces.

[Boboday555]

Previous Buchanan predictions:
"Iraq Does Have WMDS"
"The Iraq War Will Be Over In Less Than a Year'
"Iraq Oil will Par For The Oil War Not The taxpayers"
"We'll be greeted as liberators"
"Bin Laden and Hussein were in cahoots"

Sorry Patty Boy but, maybe you should take a break on making predictions for a while.

[morbie5]

Am I the only one that has ever watched Buchanan on tvor read his column??? He made none of those predictions. He is not a neocon. He was against the Iraq war back in 2002!!!! If you don't do your homework its you that looks like a fool...

[WomanInOrangeSweater]

Uhhhh, one thing...Buchanan didn't make any of those predictions. He was against going into Iraq in the first place. Seems his predictions are more trustworthy than your "facts".

>

I never thought I'd see the day when I'd defend Pat Buchanan (maybe it's a sign of armageddon). but Jeez, I'm so sick of this ignorant hate slinging on both sides.

[WomanInOrangeSweater]

Damn...I inserted a quote from an article Buchanan wrote in American Conservative mag in 2004 that expressed his lack of support for the war in no uncertain terms. But anyone with an ounce of intellectual curiousity can find buchanan's position and predictions on Iraq.

[mengwise36]

Lying about a Republican does not make you a good Democrat.

[Kitty40]

The bigger question is "Why is Pat Buchanan still allowed to appear on television and speak to any American audience after his condescending and racial remarks regarding African Americans? I am sick of seeing his face on television - he should put on the white sheet that he use to wear in the 50s.

[morbie5]

If Pat Buchanan is such a racist why was his VP running-mate in 2000 an African-American woman?? The days of throwing around the "racist" tag just because someone doesn't have white guilt are over. Don't embarrass yourself...

[BetterDeadthanRedState]

What a coincidence! Those are exactly the same odds as Bush and Cheney being tried as war criminals!

[paixa3]

If this happens, then Ms. Pelosi and other Dems can be blamed.

They have NOT FULFILLED their responsibility of IMPEACHMENT.

To hell with them all.

[Axolotl]

what a lying, cheating blowhard that Pat B is. he would like there to be bombing because it gets his pseudopatriotic rocks off.

he should be McCain's vice president. two rightwingers lusting and working for war and the killing of foreigners and Americans--the more the merrier as far as those two slugs are returned.

no free pass for Johnny McC when it comes to working hard for war and killing.

[WomanInOrangeSweater]

I got the impression that Buchanan is against bombing Iran (and he was against Iraq)...he was just predicting the obvious. And the obvious reaction? bomb, bomb the messenger.

[Beaux510]

It's amazing that just because Buchanan wrote it or said it, the leftys will ASSUME its in agreement with Bushco.

HE IS AGAINST ANY SUCH ATTACK.

HE IS WARNING EVERYONE THAT BUSHCO IS GETTING INTO POSITION TO STRIKE IRAN.

HE IS SURPRISED BY THE LACK OF ATTENTION TO THE SUBJECT BY THOSE WHO SHOULD BE SMACKING IT DOWN

I REPEAT BUCHANAN ISN'T A NEOCON AND IS TRYING TO BLOW THE WHISTLE LOUDLY ON BUSH AND CHENEY.

Jeebus people, do some research, or merely read what he actually said or has written.

HE IS ON YOUR SIDE ON THIS ONE.

[jaglon]

If what Buchanan says is true, would please ride on top of the first bomb that drops. I do not know why anyone listens to this openly raciest man. All of the major networks treat him as representive of some large group when really he represents a small, but load, crack-pot fringe on the right.

It would not surprise me if Bush-Cheney do drop bombs on Iran especially if the democrats win in November. They would love to saddle the next administration with their mess so that someone else can be blamed for the problems they created. Congress should not allow these two to do this.

The long record for Bush is business failures and the last 8 years have made this perfectly plain. Know one paid attention to his poor track record before he was selected president. But it is all there failure after failure with financial bail-outs from Dad's wealthy pals including some in the Saudi royal family.