U.S. Officials Begin Crafting Iran Bombing Plan

[sabra]

Source: Fox News

WASHINGTON — A recent decision by German officials to withhold support for any new sanctions against Iran has pushed a broad spectrum of officials in Washington to develop potential scenarios for a military attack on the Islamic regime, FOX News confirmed Tuesday.

Germany — a pivotal player among three European nations to rein in Iran's nuclear program over the last two-and-a-half years through a mixture of diplomacy and sanctions supported by the United States — notified its allies last week that the government of Chancellor Angela Merkel refuses to support the imposition of any further sanctions against Iran that could be imposed by the U.N. Security Council.

The announcement was made at a meeting in Berlin that brought German officials together with Iran desk officers from the five member states of the Security Council. It stunned the room, according to one of several Bush administration and foreign government sources who spoke to FOX News, and left most Bush administration principals concluding that sanctions are dead.

...

Consequently, according to a well-placed Bush administration source, "everyone in town" is now participating in a broad discussion about the costs and benefits of military action against Iran, with the likely timeframe for any such course of action being over the next eight to 10 months, after the presidential primaries have probably been decided, but well before the November 2008 elections.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296450,00.html

---

:scared:

[AndyA]

1. We're paying the price for Bush's foolishness around the world.

And for his feeling up of Chancellor Merkel. That was no shoulder massage, that was a "I'm more powerful than you, and there's nothing you can do about it" reminder.

Impeach Bush/Cheney and restore democracy to America.

[saigon68]

8. Here are the Cheerleaders of the Iran Bombing Effort

[arewenotdemo]

9. The town drunk and his boyfriend.

[corkhead]

14. the biggest two mistakes of the 2000 election. One made by the Supreme Court and one made by Gore

[Toots]

22. Gore is such an intelligent person, that to make such a decision really baffles me.

I was not happy with his pick at the time, but I never expected Holy Joe to get so damn extreme.

[harun]

52. Yah to Gore's credit no one knew Joe could go that far off the reservation (n/t)

[lovuian]

86. Gore was Duped and set up for Failure just as Kerry was

its pretty obvious that the Democratic Party has been infiltrated by NWO or if you want to call them Republican in Democrat clothes( Liberman prime example)

but I will spell it out for you all as time grows closer to WWIII

The two or three party systems have been majorly infiltrated by a cabal which help take over this country

Americans were Duped Lied Wiretapped Elections Stolen and dragged into Iraq War on LIES

Our Military is being destroyed by this cabal

America must be taken over if World Domination is to continue by Corporations

that means their Military structure had to be totally redone which Rumsfeld's mission was to get Generals to retire or jump on the NWO bandwagon problem is they all are FAILIING

Iran bombing is going to FAIL

they even know it but they must go through with it

because they can't admit THEY FAILED

[RainDog]

99. I didn't like it either, but...

Lieberman was on the ticket, imo, to win Florida and to counter statements about immoral liberals, etc. etc. the second part reiterates, for me, that we live in a nation full of people who vote against their own interests because they believe imposition of personal "morals" trumps "moral governing."

[arewenotdemo]

56. Amen to that!

[Buns_of_Fire]

100. The look..... of love..... is on..... his face.....

The look of love is in your eyes
A look your smile can't disguise
The look of love is saying so much more than just words could ever say
And what my heart has heard, well it takes my breath away

I can hardly wait to hold you, feel my arms around you
How long I have waited
Waited just to love you, now that I have found you

You've got the
Look of love, it's on your face
A look that time can't erase
Be mine tonight, let this be just the start of so many nights like this
Let's take a lover's vow and then seal it with a kiss

I can hardly wait to hold you, feel my arms around you
How long I have waited
Waited just to love you, now that I have found you
Don't ever go
Don't ever go

-- Diana Krall
http://www.lyricsdomain.com/4/diana_krall/the_look_of_love.html

[mod mom]

2. WTF? "costs and benefits of military action against Iran" READ:

cost=military lives, destruction of a country, environmental destruction, larger deficit, proliferation of new terrorists, hatred toward America

benefits=profits for the military industrial complex

[sabra]

3. remember just a few years ago bombing Iran was only a tinfoil hat conspiracy...

[Megahurtz]

43. And Even Recently Here On D.U.

Where are the Naysayers now? :shrug:

[ronnie624]

54. I remember.

Apparently many thought the so called neocons were joking as they revealed their desires and plans in the PNAC documents. "Dealing with Iran" has always been integral to their plot to dominate the Middle East and its oil.

[amandabeech]

88. And its natural gas.

Iran and Qatar split one of the world's largest natural gas fields. Russia has more gas than either of them, but Iran and Qatar are, I think, numbers 2 and 3.

There isn't a lot of natural gas left here in North America. Gas is not only for heating buildings, generating electricity and cooking food, it is also an enormously important feedstock for all kinds of chemicals, including the nitrogen component of fertilizer.

Iran's oil production is or will be in decline soon. A lot of what they have left is heavy and probably sour. It is very difficult to refine into gasoline.

[ronnie624]

91. I agree completely .

Natural gas should not be underestimated as a necessity to modern technology or as a motive for the Bush Administrations crimes in the Middle East.

Usually, I use the term 'hydrocarbons' in order to include both natural gas and oil.

[amandabeech]

94. Good idea. n/t

[KansDem]

92. According to the CIA factbook...

Iran:

Oil - production:
3.979 million bbl/day (2005 est.)
Oil - consumption:
1.51 million bbl/day (2004 est.)
Oil - exports:
2.836 million bbl/day (2004 est.)
Oil - imports:
NA bbl/day
Oil - proved reserves:
132.5 billion bbl based on Iranian claims (2006 est.)
Natural gas - production:
83.9 billion cu m (2004 est.)
Natural gas - consumption:
85.54 billion cu m (2004 est.)
Natural gas - exports:
3.56 billion cu m (2004 est.)
Natural gas - imports:
5.2 billion cu m (2004 est.)
Natural gas - proved reserves:
26.62 trillion cu m (1 January 2005 est.)

CIA factbook

[amandabeech]

93. Impressive numbers.

However, I'd be leary of that proved oil reserve number. The bigger the reserves the bigger the OPEC quota.

[Mudoria]

82. Still is... they probably have plans to bomb every country

on earth. As does the defense departments of every other nation on the planet. Yet another sensationalized article to inflame the wingers on both sides of the spectrum....

[Jackpine Radical]

7. When you put it like that, our course is clear.

Bombs away!

[mod mom]

13. You have to have your priorities-which the neocons obviously do. :(

[Demeter]

17. And They Blame It On the Germans! The French Weren't Available This Time!

Why not just come out and admit it's Cheney's War, and get all the credit where it's due? If there's going to be an intervention, now would be a good time!

[emilyg]

25. The bklame is on Clinton

:sarcasm:

[peacetalksforall]

35. Make that the Cheney/Baron > Iran War.

[tinrobot]

28. But the price of oil will go up.

That will be the only basis for their decision.

[yurbud]

41. and tens of trillions worth of oil contracts for big oil

[rich1107]

4. Old news

See:
http://www.cisd.soas.ac.uk/Editor/assets/iran%20study%2007.07.pdf

Short version:
The study considers the potential for US and allied war on Iran and the attitude of key states. The study concludes that the US has made military preparations to destroy Iran’s WMD, nuclear energy, regime, armed forces, state apparatus and economic infrastructure within days if not hours of President George W. Bush giving the order. The US is not publicizing the scale of these preparations to deter Iran, tending to make confrontation more likely. The US retains the option of avoiding war, but using its forces as part of an overall strategy of shaping Iran’s actions.


Any attack is likely to be on a massive multi-front scale but avoiding a ground invasion. Attacks focused on WMD facilities would leave Iran too many retaliatory options, leave President Bush open to the charge of using too little force and leave the regime intact.

US bombers and long range missiles are ready today to destroy 10,000 targets in Iran in a few hours.

US ground, air and marine forces already in the Gulf, Iraq, and Afghanistan can devastate Iranian forces, the regime and the state at short notice.

Some form of low level US and possibly UK military action as well as armed popular resistance appear underway inside the Iranian provinces or ethnic areas of the Azeri, Balujistan, Kurdistan and Khuzestan. Iran was unable to prevent sabotage of its offshore-to-shore crude oil pipelines in 2005.

Nuclear weapons are ready, but most unlikely, to be used by the US, the UK and Israel. The human, political and environmental effects would be devastating, while their military value is limited.

Israel is determined to prevent Iran acquiring nuclear weapons yet has the conventional military capability only to wound Iran’s WMD programmes.

The attitude of the UK is uncertain, with the Brown government and public opinion opposed psychologically to more war, yet, were Brown to support an attack he would probably carry a vote in Parliament. The UK is adamant that Iran must not acquire the bomb.

Short and long term human, political and economic consequences of any war require innovative approaches to prevent the crisis becoming war.

[sabra]

5. I guess the "new news" is that BushCo are claiming that diplomacy has failed...

[killbotfactory]

6. Lieberman is drooling over them as we speak

[Roland99]

10. Is this a new April Glaspie moment?

:scared:

[sarcasmo]

11. If Fox News is confirming something you know it was leaked from the White House.

Looks like ten bucks a gallon gas and Martial Law, Thanks Dictator Bush you have made my life complete.

[ClintonTyree]

30. Oh, that it only stopped at $10 a gallon gas.......

and even martial law will almost look good compared to the conflagration of World War III this will undoubtedly cause.

The U.S. and Iran will not be the only countries involved if this happens. Bush will have pissed off Russia, China and just about everyone else. We can all kiss our asses goodbye if they're allowed to go through with this insipid "plan". :mad:

[sarcasmo]

55. Thom Hartman had this Idiot on today who all but confirmed it was going to happen before

the Dictator leaves office. Watch for Russian and China to get involved, IMHO of course.

[HuffleClaw]

12. "after the presidential primaries have probably been decided"

gee, how convenient. so, as everything else, they will use a war with iran for purely political purposes.

[MasonJar]

15. When one thinks that there is nothing left that W can screw up....,

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!a new eventuality arises like the phoenix and sets him off on a new catastrophic adventure, where he hangs like a giant albatross around America's neck.

[jonnyra]

16. This is just sick.

What kind of minds push to bomb innocent people? What kind of minds seriously believe we have the right to bomb any fucking nation we want? What kind of minds want to see bombs dropped on a nation who as done nothing to us?

We are truly sick and scary nation. America is a shameful, war mongering rogue entity which by all rights should be confronted by the rest of the world. The rest of the world should be pushing for sanctions against America for terrorist acts against sovereign nations. Is there no one out there who can stop these murderous fucks? Are we destined to sit here and watch more bombs be dropped on more children by this insane White House?

We live in sad, depressing time in America people. Bush and the republicans have turned America into some dark and strange land...a frightening, rogue nation ready to bomb anyone they wish. When will the world say enough? When will the world push for sanctions against the terrorist nation known as America? When will the world demand an end to the unprovoked attacks against innocent people? I hope thats not far off...I dream of the day America is confronted by the world to stop the war monger, belligerent behavior and become part of world community again.

This is the America Bush and the criminal republican party have made. God bless America my ass.

[lmarcotty]

18. no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, noooooooooooooooo BOOM

:nuke:

the worst of it is that even if I call the charming Senators Levin and Stabenow, it won't make any difference. They'll still have their stupid strategies and excuses and rationalizations and "know more than thou" platitudes to tell us why they can't do anything. I won't bother to call Congressman Walberg because he'll be cheering when they go in.

L-A

[0rganism]

19. I question the use of the word "begin" in this headline

Seems to me, any number of variations on existing strategic plans for destruction of Iran's (or any other country's) military and/or civilian infrastructure would already be in a continuous cycle of update and approval. That much should be a given, considering our immense "defense" budget.

The only plans bush administration officials are likely to "begin crafting" now are on the order of talking points and propaganda schedules for various parts of one of the predetermined bombardment orders.

[bemildred]

20. Cheney's PR offensive seems to be fully operational. nt

[Joanne98]

21. Start a war right before the election! AGAIN!

[TexasLawyer]

23. total disconnect

If the UN and our closest allies won't support sanctions against Iran, doesn't that tremendously WEAKEN the case for sanctions, let alone the case for all out war?

[doublethink]

24. Not in Bush World .....

"United Nations Security Council has not lived up to its responsibilities, so we will rise to ours," Bush said. -snip- ... That taken from this old article just before the Iraqi War http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/17/sprj.irq.bush.speech/index.html A short chilling read looking back now .... one more excerpt ... 'Bush promised Iraqis that their "day of liberation was near" and that life without Saddam would be "prosperous and free" with "no more wars of aggression against your neighbors, no more poison factories, no more executions of dissidents, no more torture chambers and rape rooms."' -snip- ..... We all know about Abu Ghraib now, ummmmm the prosperity and freedom Iraqis have now, and of course no one is threating Iraq's neighbors ...... oh wait. Never-mind. Peace.

[calteacherguy]

26. I fully expect war to begin within that 8-10 month window.

Edit: or possibly a little later, like October before the election. Certainly there will be war with Iran before the next election, unless there is a widespread uprising in the U.S. against it.

This is why the Democratic Party leadership was unwise not to court Wes Clark this time around. Having him speak out against administration policies as the voice of the Democratic Party would have put us in an excellent position to counter the neocon agenda. As it is now, the nominee will simply be portrayed as weak on national security if they oppose the war.

Same old, same old.

[trusty elf]

27. After that, you know what's next?

Massive simultaneous nukular strikes on all of the unsaved in order to precipitate the rapture. :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

[Whoa_Nelly]

29. This is the media push Cheney planned on initiating around/on 9/11

Media Drumbeat! Iran! Terror! Iran! Terror!
Complicit Media For War! Complicit Congress For War!


Fuckers :grr::mad: :mad:

[harun]

53. On the McLaughlin Group over the weekend one of the predictions

was that the full on (neo-con) media blitz (propaganda) for war with Iran would start within 30 days.

If you look at the neo-cons though, you will see they have been floating a bunch of attack Iran garbage into the media about every 3-8 months the whole time B*sh has been in office. None of it has stuck, they keep trying. As much as I see them wanting to do this I do not think constitutionally they could get away with it having the Dem's in control of Congress (and with how many high powered Senators are running for President).

I think they will try (again) but will fail. There will be no war with Iran. We model such things out very well and the scenarios we could possibly have after taking such action are catastrophic. Not to mention the Iranian regime would immediately achieve 90%+ approval ratings (at home) if attacked.

China and Russia are not going to let the U.S. own the Middle East. The only countries that would like to see the attack are Israel and Saudi Arabia. That is not enough support (which is good, attacking them would be stupid).

It would certainly get everyone to forget about Iraq though.

[Kagemusha]

31. The real head-splitter: they think Iran can do no worse in Iraq

because if they thought that, logic would compel them to abandon attacking Iran, and they're not gonna do that.

[and-justice-for-all]

32. Is there a more competent source than Faux? nt

[obxhead]

44. They were the first to call * winner in both elections...

They don't always lie.

[StarryNite]

33. I hate those sons of bitches!

I really, really hate them.

[ohio2007]

34. another US to bomb Iran thread?

[Occulus]

37. And if we do

will you eat your plate of crow?

[ohio2007]

90. Still waiting for you

to eat crow two years old ...its very cold ;)

[Megahurtz]

47. THERE'S A Naysayer!

Just in time for The Party. :popcorn:

I suppose you think that it will never happen?:eyes:

[ohio2007]

83. You've been wrong for two years now....

I'll bet that crow tastes great ;)
so, when is your new target date?

[Megahurtz]

95. I Guess According To You

it hasn't happened in two years so that means it will never happen? :wtf:
Better hope you stocked up on Iodide pills.

[ohio2007]

98. And you know it will happen in June 2008?

or is it on for June 2009?
Why, that would mean a dem president gave the attack order.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x274657
You were so positive it was going to happen in June 2005. <crickets> Even the Iranian dinnerjacket knows it won't happen

I guess you can say the British did invade Iran by sea and the Dutch by land not long ago

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=195_1189687894


I'll save the thread and heat up your fried crow dinner Megahurtz after the Nov '08 election ;)

oh,
in the meantime you can
" Keep hope alive "

[go west young man]

36. I would advise being wary of the way Faux has framed this article.

A small snippet: The Germans voiced concern about the damaging effects any further sanctions on Iran would have on the German economy — and also, according to diplomats from other countries, gave the distinct impression that they would privately welcome, while publicly protesting, an American bombing campaign against Iran's nuclear facilities.


Faux chooses to say "according to diplomats from other countries it gives the distinct impression the Germans privately welcome attacking Iran. That is called Faux spin for those that aren't familiar with it. Would those other countries quite possible be us and England?

[lonestarnot]

38. Now who's full of shit motherfucker doubters?

[madhoosier]

39. The propaganda roll out has started.

I’ve had CNN on for most of the day and not an hour passes without some sort of anti-Iranian rhetoric. One hour they are supplying the Sunni Taliban in Afghanistan with arms, the next they are supporting Shia insurgents in Iran. There is little doubt that the new product roll out planned by this administration for September is propaganda to get the End Timers, the AIPAC’ers, and the NeoNaziCon’s blood boiling for an attack on Iran.

But it gets even worse, since Iran is a client state of Russia and China and Russia and China have vitally important economic relations with Iran the United States can not expect Russia and China to sit on the sidelines in the event of an American attack on Iran. NeoCon doctrine states that no nation shall be allowed to threaten American hegemony and with Russia’s vast energy resources and China’s vast economic growth coupled with the nightmare NeoCon economic policies have wrought on the American economy both Russia and China are poised to outflank the American economy over the next decades.

Speaking of the economy even CNN is now using the “R” word, recession, on a frequent basis, the melt down of the sub-prime mortgage market, plummeting consumer demand, skyrocketing inflation, soaring energy costs, and unemployment numbers that greatly understate unemployment will make a recession the best case scenario with economic hard times not seen since the Great Depression.

War with Iran will serve as the much needed scapegoat for the economic situation that’s a direct result of the economic policies of Bush. When the bombs drop on Iran the flow of 25% of the world’s oil that passes through the 37 mile wide Straits of Hormuz every day will cease, oil will top $100.00 a barrel overnight and to open the Straits Bush will order an area along Iran’s Persian Gulf coast the size of the state of Illinois carpet nuked.

Once the Nuclear Genie has been uncorked tactical nukes will destroy Iran’s infrastructure and Iran’s oil fields will be seized.

But it gets still worse; Russia and China will be preemptively attacked in an attempt to take out their nuclear arsenals. A year and a half ago in the NeoCon rag “Foreign Affairs” an article entitled Nuclear Primacy http://tinyurl.com/rq3sc made the case that an American nuclear first strike against Russia and China was “winnable.”

When this administration goes outlaw internationally they will also go outlaw domestically, declaring a National Emergency, implementing martial law, rounding up dissenters to fill the Halliburton Camps, and canceling elections.

For the first six years of this administration every descision was vetted for its political impact, about a year ago the policy was reversed, Rummy wasn’t fired till the day after the election, Libby’s sentence was commuted before he served one day in jail, with 60% of the people wanting us to leave Iraq Bush escalates the troop forces, and Bush mocks the will of the people that turned both houses of congress over to the democrats in the last election. There’s only one reason that I can think of to quit considering the political impact of policy, if you plan on becoming a dictator.

[Megahurtz]

49. Eeeeeks!

>>>"The U.S. Air Force has finished equipping its B-52 bombers with nuclear-armed cruise missiles, which are probably invisible to Russian and Chinese air-defense radar.<<<

Kinda like what happened the other day when two Nuclear Warheads were "discovered" locked and loaded "by accident" aboard a B-52 on an Airbase which is a stopping point bound for the Middle East???

If that's not enough to creep anyone out I don't know what will. :scared:

[tocqueville]

40. 20 000 US casualties at sea not unlikely

http://www.cisd.soas.ac.uk/Editor/assets/iran%20study%2007.07.pdf

"Iranian capability

The Iranian navy is very small and vulnerable. There are three areas to examine.
Shore to ship missiles, speed boat swarms and human torpedoes. Numerous studies of
Iranian naval strategy emphasise anti ship missiles and “swarms” of missile firing
speed-boats. Nevertheless the asymmetric threat from small boats is formidable.
Every night many hundred small boats pass between Iran and its neighbours on the
Southern shores of the Gulf. Wargaming has shown what can happen if Iran chooses
to ‘redcell’, or strike first in wargame jargon:

On the second day of the battle he put a fleet of small boats up against the
aircraft carrier battle group to track the ships. Then without warning, he
bombarded them in an hour-long fusillade of cruise missiles. At the end of the
surprise attack, sixteen ships lay on the bottom. Had the 'game' been real instead
of just a 'game' twenty thousand servicemen and women would have been killed
before their own army had fired a shot. 'As the commander, I'm sitting there and
I realize the First Team had said that they were going to adopt a policy of
preemption' Van Riper says, ' So I struck first. We had done all the calculations
on how many cruise missiles their ships could handle, so we simply launched
more than that, from many different directions, from offshore and onshore, from
air, from sea. We probably got half of their ships. We picked the ones we wanted.
The aircraft carrier, the biggest cruisers. There were six amphibious ships. We
knocked out five of them."

but the last conclusion of the paper speaks for itself:

"The two world wars of 1914-18 and 1939-1945, the creation of nuclear
weapons, and the advent of global warming have created successive lessons
that humanity and states cannot prosper or survive long unless they hold their
security in common-sharing sovereignty and power to ensure both survival
and prosperity.

A “successful” US attack, without UN authorisation, would return the world to
the state that existed in the period before the war of 1914-18, but with nuclear
weapons."

[Jackpine Radical]

51. There it is, right there in front of our noses. That's what they're after:

A “successful” US attack, without UN authorisation, would return the world to
the state that existed in the period before the war of 1914-18, but with nuclear
weapons."

[Megahurtz]

42. Like Fucking Clockwork.

:nuke:
Holy Shit. This is absolutely insane. :wow:

[spooked]

45. AFTER the primaries...How convenient

"after the presidential primaries have probably been decided, but well before the November 2008 elections."

[The Stranger]

46. Can someone awaken the Nancy from its slumbers? We need impeachment back on the table.

Is she complicit in these war crimes?

[Megahurtz]

50. A.I.P.A.C. Gets

what A.I.P.A.C. wants with Nancy, unfortunately. :(

[GeorgeGist]

48. Fox News ...

is a well-placed Bush administration source and 'everyone in town' knows that the Bush Administration never plans anything that isn't based on bullshit.

[EnricoFermi]

57. Attack on Iran Coincides with Presidential Election

Source: Jerusalem Post

Germany's unwillingness to impose further sanctions on Iran has pushed the United States closer towards a decision on a military strike, Fox News reported on Wednesday.

According to the report, Germany's decision has spurred senior US army officials to try and convince US Foreign Secretary Condoleezza Rice to abandon once and for all the diplomatic route of preventing a nuclear Iran. The report further stated that the date of preference for an attack against Iran is in eight to ten months - after the US presidential candidates for both the Democrats and the Republicans have been chosen, but before the major presidential campaign kicks off.

The report stated that the attack would be comprised of two main strategies: cutting off the Iranian gas supply, which the US hopes would pressure the Iranian people towards action against their government, and an aerial bombing campaign, which would be meant to paralyze Iranian defenses and allow American bombers to destroy the nuclear facilities.

Opponents to a military strike claim that an attack would require at least one week of intense bombing, and that it would only set the Iranian nuclear program back a few years, the report said. Two other claims of the opponents is that an American strike would provoke Iran into attacking Israel, and that abandoning diplomatic action would negatively impact Iraq and the US troops stationed there.

Read more: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1189411396419&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

---

Now we see how they plan to win the election and preserve the Republican White House.

An attack on Iran will greatly escalate the war in the region, and many Americans trust a Republican more than a Democrat to manage the war, as seen in 2004, and as we can assume by the timing. This move is very much political, and we will see that even more Americans will die in order to just win an election! Estimates based upon war games place this total at 20,000 soldiers, not to mention the countless civilians affected by this political move. As we have seen, estimates are frequently off by orders of magnitude and this administration is consistently underestimating a war, at least publicly.

It is disturbing to me that even the most ludicrous ideas are starting to become reality. The escalation, planning, and propaganda we theorized about only months ago are now a reality. It is time to start taking this seriously, even if there is a good chance that it is an overreaction. This is something that we cannot overlook.

[EV_Ares]

58. This should have been taken seriously from the beginning. This

administration has certainly shown us all they are capable of most anything to preserve and keep all power to themselves at all costs. This includes sending americans into war and starting other wars. Whatever it takes including stealing elections. Our fearless dem leaders should have been countering this from the beginning. They could have got the word out more in all the media, newspapers, mags, tv, radio, whatever. I think americans and the world would listen if the messenger told the story in a credible way. It is a very unnerving thought.

[EnricoFermi]

66. People here are getting sick of these Iran postings

I understand that, but we've also seen some of these tin foil hat theories coming to reality in the last few days:

Launching of a PR campaign on stations such as Faux, the week after Labor Day
We have seen this now on Hannity and Colmes, interviews with Ron Paul, questions to Petraeus, BillO's show, and general connections being made when talking about Iraq and IED's. Also, the questions at the most recent Republican debate were basically framing Iran.

The administration is actively planning an attack
We just got a story about a new military base being built on the border, British troops moving there, and an Israeli attack on Syria (Iranian installations) make it all the more plausible. Also, numerous reports have come out about specific planning. Israel and the United States have been practicing in both war games and flybys.

Strikes on Iran are likely to happen
This was pretty much just validated by this article and Cheney gloating about diplomacy failing and seeing only a militaristic solution. Also, Kucinich, Paul, Obama and others are taking this very realistically.

Obviously there is possibility that this is just a scare tactic, but knowing what we do about this administration, they act on their threats. The attack on Syria was also further evidence of this. It is hardly tin foil hat based anymore.

[EV_Ares]

78. U said it well. I hope people read & do take seriously. eom.

[Newsjock]

59. But, but ...

... if the Republicans launch an attack on Iran, the Democratic leadership must keep its power dry in case something really important comes up!!

[Harper_is_Bush]

60. This is essentially an opinion piece, no? n/t

[Kagemusha]

61. It's spin on a J-Post reprint of a The Times piece. Both Murdoch rags

I am not blaming the original poster for this but, that means that the information came out like, a full day ago. It just got reprinted and treated like fresh news. The poster did add a lot of interpretation at the end of the quoted stuff. I'm not sure I agree but, certainly, people are claiming there are political considerations.

[EnricoFermi]

64. okay, changed the headline

The article just came out on the jpost site, and even since being posted has had many updates, including the fact that Cheney and others are gloating about Rice failing with diplomacy. Syria was also bombed, and this was just reported to be an Iranian missile installation.

It was the first time that I saw the bolded text, so I felt it was important.

The timing is important though, and is more of a conclusion of the article, although it is still an assumption. The supposed planning is obviously related to the election, but the conclusion, that it is to provide a Republican continuation, is not necessarily something that can be directly assumed from the article text.

However, I would find it hard to believe that intentionally timing around the presidential election isn't associated with political agenda. No other conclusion makes much sense, especially given comments by Rove, Cheney, and others about a permanent Republican executive.

If you disagree with my conclusion, I would appreciate your opinion.

[MisterP]

62. DLC: but if we get on board and set out impaled Iranian infants outside the Capitol

we can ride this wave into the White House. Oh, THEN we'll enact our liberal agenda (heh, heh, heh...)

[Bitwit1234]

63. After the mess bush and the republicans have made of this war

why in the hell would this country trust them to do anything. If you think back FDR handled World War II and Harry Truman the Korean War. Ike got us into Viet Nam and Johnson fell into it and couldn't get us out. But I don't think republicans know what the hell they are doing in war time. Maybe it is because they are all such a bunch of cowards they have never fought in one.

[GreenTea]

65. These fucking military & BushCo psycho's just can't wait to use their deadly toys

They'll just sit back backslapping each other while laughing with their cigars & whiskey...who in the fuck do they think they are? They'll continue to repeat this bullshit line...."And then let the Iranian people take their country back." These fucking liars, just like Iraqi's under Hussein, Iran is a sovereign nation and is the Iranian peoples country....as if another democracy will be formed (forced) like in Iraq? Get Real it can't and won't happen with a gun barrel pointed at them.

Think what you want, but Iran has the world's third largest oil reserves as if that plays no part in these corporate criminals minds....Cheney & the oil boys have had their eye on Iran long before the Iraq invasion....They believed with all the forced 'patriotism" it would be an easy plan to get through and a cake walk....things have changed, they been somewhat exposed, no thanks to the MSM...and still these crazy neo-con fuckers are going to do it anyway, illegally attack Iran...They have nothing to lose and all to gain in their eyes chaos in the region, oil, never ending war for profit and destroying America and it's social programs and structure as we've known it, into an attack prone battlefield in the US for fascism to take solid and absolute control.

Just look to Bush's business partners, Saudi Arabia for most of the "insurgents" and attacks on American troops...Iran doesn't even come close to the Saudis deadly influx into Iraq.

[EnricoFermi]

67. Israel

Israel reportedly wanted the United States to leave Iraq alone and focus on attacking Iran. We obviously chose Iraq, in what some have said had to have been a personal vendetta of Bush's, but given what we know, Iran has never left the table. Cheney has said that he doesn't trust any successor to handle the situation and that diplomacy has failed.

Israel is very serious about us completing this goal. As stretched to the limit as we are, our Air Force and Navy are very much prepared for this, as are the Israelis. They have been preparing for this for a long time, and so have we.

My only question is how are they going to convince the public to go into another war? Is it that they just don't care? Apparently only the support of 30 percent or so is all that is necessary, and I suspect they will achieve that.

[kysrsoze]

72. A nice false flag operation would convince enough idiots to sway public opinion

The American public seems to have a frighteningly short memory about the run-up to the Iraq War. If enough people are actually seeing the similarities, it's certainly not being reported.

[Karenina]

84. You GO, GT!!!

Boys and their toys, indeed. And this whacky lot has been whackin' off since they seized control in 2000. BATTEN THE HATCHES!!! :toast:

[SleeplessinSoCal]

68. This is what I definintely do not believe.....

"....many Americans trust a Republican more than a Democrat to manage the war...."

That CANNOT be true!

[Kool Kitty]

69. It isn't true, according to some recent polls.

I personally wouldn't trust these people to tell me what day it was, let alone handle a war. Look how swimmingly the current wars are going.

[EnricoFermi]

70. I didn't say most

If there is an all-out war between the United States and various radical Muslim groups worldwide, who would you rather have in charge — Democrats or Republicans?

Democrats 41%
Republicans 38%
Both the same
(not listed) 9%
Don't know
(not listed) 12%

http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/06/fox_poll_more_americans_trust_dems_to_handle_world_war_iii_against_islamofascists.php

And opinions change, with new wars and fear. Where we are at now, certainly more people are in favor of Democratic leadership. However, if scared enough into new attacks, it is often those advocating harsh actions that win out, due to anger. We attacked the terrorists by destroying two other countries, even though the logical conclusion shouldn't have been this. Look at what initiating attacks on Iraq did to approval ratings (up 20% in a few days to 75%).

graph: http://www.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/Approval.htm

If lets say we attack Iran, and they take out a battleship or carrier, you can bet that the public reaction will be in favor of an all out war. If what these war games predict is true, at least one major attack on a base or naval ship is very likely. That alone would be enough, at least in the opinion of people like Cheney, to convince the population to go for "stronger" and "harsher" leadership. It is obvious, by Obama and Clinton trying to appear like warriors regarding Iran, that they understand this reaction, as much as I disagree with it.

[EV_Ares]

79. Yes, if the war is launched, people tend to want to stay with the President

and then the drumbeating starts up and we already know the republicans have the corporate media behind them on this so the average joe on the street reads about the villainous Iranians or whoever the enemy is at that time and the war calls are fulfilled and stronger. It goes on and on and war feeds itself.

[snot]

71. I'm not sure what's true matters --

if the Repubs. who control our elections think they can spin it as a plausible explanation for an otherwise surprising Repub. win.

[EnricoFermi]

73. Their delusions are enough

They thought we'd just get in and out of Iraq, and we'd all just be happy with what they had done.

The arrogance is astounding and I just don't see an end to it.

[still_one]

74. If this happens, I will be curious what our Democratic leaders will say why they didn't impeach

Just because they do not believe they could convict doesn't mean they couldn't start proceedings, and if there was enough evidence they might convict

[Ian David]

75. You're thinking too small. Think in terms of immanentizing the eschaton. n/t

[ohio2007]

76. Obviously you are talking about the Iranian elections

back in June 2005 ..and the invasions never happened then either

SSDD

[JerseygirlCT]

77. Does anyone with half a brain actually think that attacking their

gas supply would turn the Iranian people against their government and toward their attackers? Have they not even looked at the past 25-50 years of Iranian history? Even the folks who brought us the myth of US troops being welcomed with flowers can't possibly buy this.

Which means, of course, that it's purely a cold political calculation. Playing carelessly with the lives of US troops.

The only way to stop it is to publicize it. Make it common knowledge that they'll try this, for political reasons. If they're outed, they won't be able to make it work. (Not that they won't come up with something else.)

[Vinca]

80. If they attack Iran, it will deliver the presidency and the entire

House and Senate to the Democrats.

[Nihil]

87. That might be what the DLC believe ...

... but, let's face it, they are pretty delusional about most things ...

You are talking about a country that failed to prevent George W Bush
from taking a second term ... an attack on Iran will probably be viewed
as a "Good Thing" ...

:shrug:

[frankieT]

81. This time they won't bother find an excuse

à la WMD. Iran have a civil nuclear programme. And from what EVERYONE knows there is no military side-project.

Iran is Iran, I think its enough for US & ISRAEL.

[lovuian]

85. You have to understand the times we live in

Israel is reaching a moment in time where it can influence US military strategy

and it feels in danger of Iran

it was preemptive on Saddam and stopped Iraq's nuclear program

it sees Iran as a bigger threat but they of course would love for America to preemptive strike
which we have done with Iraq violating treaties galore

Israel and others NWO people realize they are at a moment in time where they must succeed

Time is running out Americans are awakening
and Martial Law and NWO is speeding up their plans

But will they be able to DO It

Everything I see says they will FAIL

they hold onto the promise of the covenant that they were chosen to lead

Leaders have compassion these men have none

[Megahurtz]

96. I Also Believe That

they will fail. If they choose to do this I bet it will backfire on them. Their evil cannot last forever.

[daleo]

89. I wonder if this is why the Russians were showing off their big bomb?

It seems pretty formidable. It could be a "watch out" message (peacetime bomb-o-gram).

[Trajan]

97. Aint gonna happen ....

1) No multinational support

2) No congressional mandate, with none foreseen ....

3) An exhausted US military already hamstrung through numbingly mindless planning and irrational oversight of military resources ... The generals are already complaining of an inability to react to other non-iraqi threats ..... how can they hope to succeed in Iran, if they are doing so poorly in Iraq ? ... What if the Iranians march into Iraq ? .... who will stop them ? ... The surge ? ..... What happens if the US military in Iraq moves toward Iranians : what of the difficult job they already are struggling against ? ....

I wouldn't put it past the idiots in charge to think this is a grand idea .... but it most certainly is not grand ..... it is pitiful in it's short sightedness ...

I vote for a US military leadership that will NOT proceed with such a plan ....

[amandabeech]

101. It may be a last gasp.,

This administration, including P & VP, don't care what the world thinks.

They will probably come up with some lame-assed, Gonzales-type way of interpreting some of the loose language in the Iraqi war resolution to allow a strike on Iran without congressional approval. Or something. These people don't care.

The question would be whether the Air Force and/or Navy would execute the orders. This would be an air strike only, and the exhausted Army wouldn't be involved.

I read recently that the Air Force, who've pretty much been left out of this stupid war, are raring to go.

Fallon, the navy guy in charge, reportedly wants to stay out of Iran.

Would the military obey?

[jmm]

102. begin?

I'm not saying they'll go through with it but they've been planning this for a long time.