First, about that need. Cheney's national security advisor, John Hannah, was quoted in the Washington Post yesterday (all the way back on page A18 -- thanks Post!) as saying "the administration considers 2007 'the year of Iran' and indicated that a U.S. attack was a real possibility." So let's stop dismissing the possibility of an attack on Iran as just a nightmarish scenario that will never come to pass. Thinkprogress.org documents this and some other notable Hannah fun facts, such as the one about him being largely responsible for the bullshit reasons that got us into Iraq, along with other Bush administration luminaries such as Douglas Feith, whose own flaming pants have recently been exposed to the world.

Douglas Feith, who carefully gathered intellgence on Iraq from his own ass

In fact, despite the litany of public denials, the build up to a war with Iran has been pretty hard to miss, as this article demonstrates. The inimitable Think Progress has also documented the burgeoning bullshit being built up to justify an Iran invasion. It's deja vu all over again, and this kind of deja vu kills. I'm not ready for World War III, ace, and I'm assuming you aren't either. This is one of those colossal-stupid mistakes, like Napoleon marching into Russia or Custer charging headlong into that little Indian Village at Little Big Horn, rubbing his hands in eager anticipation of another "victory" over Indian women and children.

The Bush Administration, ca. 1876

Now, the two-pronged assault, which means action on the parts of both the legislative and judicial branches.

These days, when one says "judicial" and "Cheney" in the same breath, the two words are usually paired with "Libby." While some trial watchers have argued that Cheney won't take the stand for the defense because his testimony would be "too damaging," others have written stories claiming that, despite having been bumped from the "certain witness" list to the "potential witness" list, Cheney will almost certainly testify. The New York Times featured a lengthy story yesterday that went along with this school of thought. And, ace, you better believe that's the school I want to believe in.

Testimony by Cheney allows the prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, to trap the vice president into serious charges. In fact, Cheney could very well be faced with a catch 22 on the stand — either perjury or admitting to outing a CIA agent. Either way, Cheney's testimony in the Libby trial sets the scene for the second phase of the war on Cheney. After Cheney's testimony, whichever way the outcome goes, it will be the legislative branch's job to impeach this sucker and kick him the hell out of Washington.

We've got to face impeachment, and Cheney's is even more important than Bush's — without his eminence grise, Bush would be less of a danger, after all. And, more and more, mainstream sources have been seeing the light. The Detroit Free Press's Rochelle Riley recently called for the dual impeachment of both of these warmongering dupes, for example. Of course, while articles of impeachment can be written up by a simple majority of the House, it takes two thirds of the Senate to actually remove someone from office. And we're far from that — just look at the Republicans in the Senate who recently managed to stymy all debate of the Iraq War troop surge. The obvious answer is that we need more Demcorats in the Senate. In my next entry, I'll outline whether the Democrats can get a filibuster-proof majority in 2008 — too late for impeachment, of course, but it'll help with undoing the damage done by these idiots since the 2000 election.

But, really, this needs to be done before then. This is no longer about removing incompetent, arrogant and evil men. This is about preventing World War III. And I've always subscribed to Albert Einstein's view regarding our next couple world wars.

"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."