In a sense, they also get to prepare the Citizens of the United States in advance. They get to start to wash our minds with the reasons for this new stage in the War on Terror. Aren't we lucky.
Some things to look for...
Don't expect an attack before the November 2006 congressional elections. Folks will get too emotional if we add a new front to the War on Terror at that time, and this might change the balance of power there to the Republicans' detriment. Of course, if the Democrats had any balls, that election would already be going to them, but since they don't, the odds favor the Republicans continuing to own the Senate and the House.
The need to expand the War on Terror will be an issue in the coming election, however. We'll get more scary news, and the election politics will be used as a way to start selling us on an attack in Iran. Look for a manufactured incident. The Iranians have to get caught doing something, probably in Iraq (which they have been doing all along anyway). Only this time we are going to catch them (or so we'll say) and this time a lot of Americans will die. Probably visiting women and children.
The powers behind the scenes need to trap the Democrats into a commitment to the War on Terror, as a permanent condition of international relations. The military-industrial complex has been looking for a substitute boogie man, since the Russian Communists became unavailable; and, what is needed is to create enough havoc internationally that we can find excuses to bring back the draft, and increase military spending (and debt). We also need this condition to drive the Dragon (China) into certain postures they otherwise wouldn't take.
With China the problem is their growing economic power. We can't compete with that, but in order to make China keep their own economic horses in check, we need to further develop our military posture and capabilities. This will force the Chinese to devote more money to their military, and, as a result, less capital to economic growth. The Chinese leadership will like this because right now they are in a struggle with their own capitalists, whose increasing wealth pits them against the former local communist leaders and warlords for power in the provinces (the real centers of power in China).
Confused yet?
You have to realize that for a lot of these players, international relations are just a big game of Risk. That's a board game for world domination using armies that ten-year-olds like to play, and the neocons and their brothers in game playing all over the world have the same moral disposition of kids that age - almost none - they are all moral children. Its all me me me, and I've got to win (while screwing everyone else seems not to matter).
Anyway, back to the Democrats. Already Kerry and Hillary Clinton have committed themselves to the War in Iraq, so it isn't much of a step to box them in as the 2008 election comes around. They will feel (or their advisers, etc.) that they can't appear weak on military issues or the War on Terror, so expect them to join in any banging the drums for winning the War in Iraq (and by implication, the War on Terror).
The administration's main argument will be that Iran can't be trusted to have nuclear weapons. Thing is the only people in history to ever use any nuclear weapons is us, and that was 60 years ago, so maybe we could see that nobody is quite that insane. Think about it. There sits Iran, with the US having bases to their Southwest in Iraq, the Israelis to their West, and Russia to their North. They're going to start a nuclear exchange? I don't think so.
The real point isn't Iran's nuclear potential in the sense of their using such weapons. The real point is that the world financial powers need to bring down the regime there, in a hard way. They used us to knock down Iraq, and now they need to topple Iran. Chaos is okay from their point of view, because they can make money if they play the results the right way. If the oil fields go out of use for a while, the oil is still there, and all that will happen is that this particular commodity gets very scarce (which makes it even more valuable). Its a win win situation.
And that's the news from the geo-political desk of the Lords of Finance.
