The US war with Iran has already begun...By Scott Ritter

[mom cat]

The US war with Iran has already begun

By Scott Ritter

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9199.htm

06/19/05 "Aljazeera" - - Americans, along with the rest of the world, are starting to wake up to the uncomfortable fact that President George Bush not only lied to them about the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (the ostensible excuse for the March 2003 invasion and occupation of that country by US forces), but also about the very process that led to war.

On 16 October 2002, President Bush told the American people that "I have not ordered the use of force. I hope that the use of force will not become necessary."

We know now that this statement was itself a lie, that the president, by late August 2002, had, in fact, signed off on the 'execute' orders authorising the US military to begin active military operations inside Iraq, and that these orders were being implemented as early as September 2002, when the US Air Force, assisted by the British Royal Air Force, began expanding its bombardment of targets inside and outside the so-called no-fly zone in Iraq.

These operations were designed to degrade Iraqi air defence and command and control capabilities. They also paved the way for the insertion of US Special Operations units, who were conducting strategic reconnaissance, and later direct action, operations against specific targets inside Iraq, prior to the 19 March 2003 commencement of hostilities.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

1. They started fighting them terrorists over there earlier than we

were told..... that's just great. I can't believe they adjusted the truth to save us from it.

[Skink]

3. I missed McGovern explaining how the war started...

in 2002. I caught it today while watching the Conyers hearing on the DSM again. This makes total sense.

[dchill]

11. They adjusted the truth...

...to save themselves from it.

[confludemocrat]

2. If they invade Iran, U.S. will rue the day-if we exist afterward

It will be Bush's Stalingrad, the "land-based operation" will be slaughtered or have to slaughter in ways not seen since the WWII in the Pacific or ever. Neither is anything you would want to think about. WWIII will be started by this. habeas corpus will be abolished and probably there will be another tax cut just before. Some sick shit will go down.
But he might do it.

[FloridaPat]

6. We can loose most of our troops with this. Iran can just bomb Iraq

places with high concentration of US troops.

[tavalon]

21. Actually, I think "they" will do this before fighting actually breaks out

and it will be the rationale for the war with Iran. The key here is who are the "they" who will use the bomb?

[DELUSIONAL]

4. Helen Thomas said something like -- by this logic -- Pearl Harbor

was justified.

In other words the Japanese did no wrong by starting a preemptive war.

Bushie the giggling killer who has never been to war -- wanted so badly to be a "war time president" that he started wars.

The one with Iraq is going badly -- the one in Afghanistan is nearly forgotten -- so he can turn over Iraq to the thugs and concentrate on Iran.

But if I remember correctly the Iranians are willing to throw every last child into battle to clear a mine field. Any hope of a peaceful transformation for the young liberals in Iran will be lost.

Bushie and his gang are active on so many fronts and doing battle with the world (Kyoto agreement for example) -- how does one keep up and where do we focus? Past, present or future?

[soundhead]

5. Get ready for the neocon 9/11 Part 2

So it seems the neocon attack on Iran is truly already under way. This sentence from the article is revealing:

"To the north, in neighbouring Azerbaijan, the US military is preparing a base of operations for a massive military presence that will foretell a major land-based campaign designed to capture Tehran."

How the hell are they going to have this "major land-based campaign" if what we read everyday about troop levels and new recruits is true, ie that there are no new recruits? (or at least substantially less than normal.)

There is only one way, and that is to have a draft. And there is only one way they know a draft is going to work. They need a huge excuse in order to enact the draft, which requires another 9/11.

The neocon terrorists are planning to hit the people of the United States with another 9/11. When will the masses wake up and realize this is not "conspiracy", but the truth.

[Tommymac]

8. Another thread spoke about using the Iraqi Army...

we are now traning for this purpose.

I don't think we'll have another 9/11 style event in the US, instead perhaps it will be in Iraq...one designed to unite the Iraqi people against their neighbors to the north instead of us.

[wallwriter]

27. First there is the issue that war is wrong and immoral.

Then there is the issue that we are already overstretched in Iraq. What the f*** do they think they are doing?!?!?

[Jackpine Radical]

13. Oh. My. God.

You are right.

"The neocon terrorists are planning to hit the people of the United States with another 9/11."

That's the only thing that makes sense.

I'm sick now.

[mom cat]

25. 9-11 happened when dimson's ratings were going south.Now that

they are lower that the toilet paper, he has nothing to lose. I am very afraid. I live in a blue state...you know that he won't target a red state!

[Conservativesux]

18. When they get thier news from somewhere other then the MSM...

..these folks are like clueless zombies, walking around thinking they are safe from "terror", when we here all know where the real terrorists are "hiding out"!

[tavalon]

22. Welcome to DU soundhead

and yes, I believe you are right. And we will be called conspiracy theorists until the moment it happens. Then everyone will forget that we said it in the craziness that will ensue.

[Emendator]

29. A draft

is a possibility. But I think that the war against Iran will be stricly an aerial campaign.

[bananas]

7. I'm surprised this isn't getting more responses

and only 2 votes for greatest.
I thought Bush was just going to bomb Iran,
apparenlty he'll be sending in ground troops.
This will be news to a lot of people.

[FloridaPat]

9. Back in October the rumor was Israel will start the bombing and the US

will then come in and help out. That way we won't be the ones that start the invasion.

[Big Lebowski]

10. I fully expect another 9/11

Support for the war is declining, we're fast running out of troops, Iraq is a disaster. The only way to feasibly go after Iran (and therefore, a draft) would be for another terrorist attack.

As someone at the prime age for a draft, it scares me.

[Beam Me Up]

14. yes, it should scare you.

It scares me and I'm 57 years old.

Somehow each of us who is beginning to 'get the picture' of what is really going down has to find some way of communicating that 'picture' to other people. They can see it if we can show it to them.

[Conservativesux]

16. There will be no draft unless * pulls another 9/11 out of the hat....

barring that there will avenues to leave the country and people who will help get the draftees out of the mess * has made in Iraq.

[Daphne08]

24. It scares me, too. I have two sons your age.

:scared:

[kineneb]

12. I am so depressed by this

It is soooooo stupid. And I worry about the members of my family who are still living in Iran. If BushCo goes through with this, it will be a disaster for the whole world.

[kster]

15. They will never

get the people in America on board with a draft,I can't see it happening, doesn't matter if they attack America or not.

[Conservativesux]

17. Perhaps so, but we need to be concentrating on getting the young men over

to countries that will take them in, unlike Canada.

Just in case, you understand, of course. ;)

[CoffeeCat]

19. I just don't see how this could happen...

I understand that Bush is a psycho and that this could be his plan.

However---

We don't have the troops to do this. So there would have to be a draft. There is no way in hell America would support a draft. Iran would be seen as an extension of Iraq--and support for that is dwindling rapidly.

We won't have international support on this. The "Coalition of the Willing" for this debacle will be able to meet in a phone booth! General support for a ground war in Iran will be much weaker than the support for Iraq. We can't invade another country alone.

I don't think the American people would support invading Iran. Bush's polls are tanking. I hear Republicans talking about how they hate Bush now--and how he's an embarrassment. The United States has had enough. They're not going to sign on for more failure.

Plus--we don't have the money. Iraq costs a billion per day. American won't support further bankrupting our country to fight battles in the Middle East that can't be won.

I just can't imagine this being pulled off.

[Beam Me Up]

33. Another terrorist event is "how this could happen"

I've said it many times in the past few years. What they need is a justification to use nuclear force in the ME. What they need is a justification for reinstituting the draft. A justification that will make all opposition mute or irrelevant.

All it will take is one small nuke in one city anywhere in the world (but most likely here in the US), a half million casualties and the 24/7 broadcast of the death and mayhem that follow and there will be NO ONE to stop them from doing whatever they want. They can blame it on the nation or terrorist 'du jour'--and who could prove otherwise?

Are they this ruthless? Oh yes. Are they insane enough? Apparently. Will they do it? I don't know but it shouldn't come as a surprise to any of us if they do.

This is what we are up against. DU and other forums like this will very quickly be brought under control. The new dark age and the age of endless war will follow.

Can they be stopped? Perhaps. But the only way I think that can be done is if we wake up a large enough portion of the population to bring about a real resistance.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tavalon]

23. Welcome Bull Moose

If Scott Ritter says it will happen, it will happen. It was suppose to happen in June but I think the Bush Junta is a little behind because things just aren't going so well in Iraq. Destroying nations is hard work, you know?

[Stand and Fight]

26. You forgot Poland.

I mean... You forgot Bolton. :evilgrin:

[nikraye]

28. See my post: Bilderberg 2005... (Sat Jun-18-05 07:17 PM)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1866655&mesg_id=1866655

snip

What is so terrifying about the Iran theatre of operations is that according to our deep sources, both of whom belong to the Bilderberg Group, there are two alternative dates set for the invasion. The earliest possible date would be the "deadest of summer" sometime in August and the other alternative is the late fall campaign. It substantially confirms the information provided by Scott Ritter, the ex-Marine turned UNSCOM weapons inspector, who stated that "George W. Bush has `signed off´ on plans to bomb Iran in June 2005." Ritter goes on to say that the June date suggests that the US and Israel are "in a state of readiness."

[snot]

30. KICK nt

[Oversea Visitor]

31. Iran

If this happen watch your kids and family die for the next hundreds years in Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran. Well maybe US will give up faster than Russia in Afghanistan.

However watch the War On Terror become a reality. Lets see how many terrorist US will create hmmmm tens of million hmmm I think thats about right since the classification is anyone resisting the US occupation is a terrorist.

Finally some insane sucide bomber will just let lose a nuke on US soil. What then who you going to nuke?

Maybe US President trying to beat Alexander or be the modern Roman empire hmmm the Mongols empire was much larger.

Oh well they got swords then only. Not today friend not to day we have too many type of WMD.

Bush not only taking US down the road to hell he taking the whole world down this road. When things get real fuck up I like to see those greedy bastards start eating their money and see how full their belly will be.

[Senior citizen]

32. Send this story to your Congresscritters

just so they won't be able to claim they didn't know.


:kick:

[aneerkoinos]

34. Azerbaidzan and Iran

So the word seems to that US will invade from Azerbaidzan (and Iraqi Kurds will join too).

Pros:
Azerbaidzan is presidential dictaturship; border with on the Caspian see (lot's of nat gaz and some oil) disputed; ethnic division of Iran, with about 20% Azeris and 10% Kurds agaist 50% Farsi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Demographics_of_Iran) and the Washington hope that Iranian Azeris and Kurds would side with US invaders and supply some or lot of the manpower (cf Afganistan war); shortest route to Tehran.
Neutral:
Azerbaidzan has close relations with Turkey, which might make Turkey friendly to Washington plans. Negated with Turkish strong opposition to Kurds snapping part of Iran.
Cons:
No direct supply line via land or sea (gotta get that heavy mechinized stuff there plus all the other supplies, airlift not enough) - in practice only possible route is via Georgia, which means Turkey must agree to let the ships through Bosporus and Russia (and her allies in Georgia) don't get too nasty; route to Tehran very mountanous: first the mountains close to Azeri border, if the locals Azeris support US not a big problem, but then must cross the very high mountains between Caspian See plains and Tehran.

[jenn1977]

35. the link didn't work for me

any ideas? i tried searching for the article there - am i missing something?

[hangloose]

36. I think this guy's on the ball, we should listen