Stuxnet + Election

Outgoing Mossad chief Meir Dagan recently concluded his term saying Iran was still far from being capable of producing nuclear weapons and that a series of malfunctions had put off its nuclear goal for several years. Therefore, he said, Iran will not get hold of the bomb before 2015 approximately.

If he's right, then it makes the 2012 election result absolutely crucial from a geopolitical standpoint.

If someone at least somewhat capable of independent thought, like Obama or Romney, is elected it would almost certainly give Iran enough time to get a nuclear deterrent.

On the other hand, if someone less capable of independant thought is elected, it stands to reason it would mean war.

In Spring of 2010 Pew did a poll of global attitudes showing that 66% of Americans surveyed were willing to consider military action to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons.

That's the highest rate of 22 countries they surveyed, with the exception of Nigeria.

This must mean that a large majority of Republicans support the idea.

So if a Republican crazy enough to go through with it wins in 2012, and Iran doesn't get a nuke before the swearing in, there's every reason to think said Republican would go through with attacking Iran.

But if a crazy Republican president is all it takes to get a war with Iran, why wasn't there one at the end of Bush's term in office?

The answer is partly that George W. Bush was less crazy than Dick Cheney, who tried to talk him into doing it.

If Bush was incapacitated and replaced by his vice president, that would've led to war with Iran.

If McCain won the 2008 election, that would've led to war with Iran.

It's quite possible that a McCainesque war hawk could win the 2012 Republican primary. In that case, it seems Obama's reelection would be the only thing standing between the world and utter catastrophe.