Cheney laid out Iran War plan Aug '05: terror attack here then bomb Iran

[yurbud]

this was in the American Conservative magazine last summer, and seems to be borne out by Seymour Hersh's recent story and the administrations own repetition of their Iraq escalation of fake crisis and diplomacy.

They may have amended the plan since then into prodding Iran to make the first move.

And there's a chance the terror attack part of this is a feint for domestic consumption like the threat of a terror attack and cancelling the 2004 election, which when it didn't occur made the actual threft of teh election look like an anti-climax.

If this does happen, the only question is whether the public will fall for the same scam again.

American Conservative magazine

August 1, 2005 Issue

In Washington it is hardly a secret that the same people in and around the administration who brought you Iraq are preparing to do the same for Iran. The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney’s office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing—that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack—but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections. (that's why the etired ones are speaking out).


http://www.amconmag.com/2005a/2005_08_01/article3.html

[Jim Warren]

1. Clark said basically the same thing

Wes Clark was on Al Franken today and he said the same thing, that the prevailing agenda after 911 in the penatgon was Iraq, Syria, Iran.

A 4 star general, fuck, HE SAID THAT!!!

[Me.]

11. The Neocon Agenda

If one checks what the lesser known players (like Luti, Wurmser, Hannah) you'll find they all had their areas of interest. Wurmser, for example, and his awful wife, have been beaming their focus on Syria for years.

*shadow government*

[Progressive4Life]

2. Don't put anything past these megalomaniacal thugs

Domestic "terrorist" attack --> suspension/repealling of the Constitution and dissolution of Congress

This leaves the supreme decider free to declare war on Iran and re-institute the draft without any checks and balances.

[yurbud]

5. I think half or more of Dems in Congress would go along with it but

American people won't. We'll see something here like is happening in South America already.

Of course all of us won't be here to see it. We'll be dead or in the Halliburton Archipelago.

[driver8]

3. This article should be printed on the front page of every newspaper in

the country!

Our so-called "leaders" are absolutely fucking insane.

Recommended!

[yurbud]

6. sadly, it's not insane. It's a calculated risk with good odds of

succeeding, at least from a domestic PR point of view given the success of their previous production, 9/11.

The odd thing is, the way this is worded, it comes pretty damn close to saying the terrorist attack is anticipated on a schedule.


We need some numerologists to figure this out.

[Sinti]

4. Whether the public will fall for the same scam again - good question

Imagine a major attack, killing not 3000, but 300,000 or more. Imagine an attack on several cities simultaneously. Dirty bomb, bio-weapon, this sort of scenario, with images of the dead and dying on TV via traffic cams if bio, or on the outskirts of the kill zone if nuke. The public would be in shock, and then filled to the brim with blood lust. A small attack and they'd be angry at our own government, a big one and they'll follow the leader into the pits of hell IMO. They'd fall for it, if the cliff was high enough.

[yurbud]

7. dirty bomb or even bio weapon won't work--not photogenic enough

We dropped dirty bombs on Iraq and Afghanistan every day--depleted uranium--and nobody gives a shit.

What do you get with chem or bio weapons? Pics of people laying in the street or being carried away on stretchers? As bad as either would be in terms of loss of life, people will be jaded to it after 9/11. Here in LA, people would probably only care about how it affect their commute: "There's a sigalert on the 10, watch out for a dispersed cloud of nerve gas. You may want to take the 60 as an alternate or surface streets."

The next terrorist attack has to be bigger than 9/11 by an order of magnitude, therefore, an actual nuke going off.

[robertpaulsen]

12. The public doesn't need to fall for it.

I believe it was Tommy Franks who said if there was another terror attack on the magnitude of 9/11, there would be martial law and/or a suspension of the Constitution. The public will be forced to accept this whether they like it or not.

I'll search for the exact quote.

[robertpaulsen]

15. Here's the Tommy Franks quote.

Tommy Franks Says Bush May Discard Constitution If Another Terrorist Attack Occurs
by Rob
Fri Nov 21, 2003 at 03:30:54 AM PDT

Gen. Tommy Franks said in an interview with the lifestyle magazine Cigar Aficionado that if another terrorist attack occurs in the United States "the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government" The stunning revelation is the headline story on the right-wing news site NewsMax for Friday. Franks said that another terrorism attack will result in "... the Western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty we’ve seen for a couple of hundred years..." He indicated that if another terrorism attack occurs Bush will likely declare martial law and the Constitution will apparently be "discarded".

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2003/11/21/63054/774

[electron_blue]

18. one more leap: why does he need a terroristic attack to declare

martial law? He could do it tomorrow if he wanted. And probably get away with it.

[Jigarotta]

13. that's the ace up their slimey sleeves...

mass panic, help me daddy.
I have no doubt if something awful like that happened, the public will not be in the frame of mind to Question Authoritay!

[magellan]

8. Is it any wonder TCM replayed "Dr Stangelove" tonight?

I think Ted Turner is sending the American public not so subliminal messages....

[redacted]

9. EXTREME K&R

[file83]

10. Is it any wonder that the article was written by a "former" CIA officer...

from the article's end:
"Philip Giraldi, a former CIA Officer, is a partner in Cannistraro Associates"

So is it really "bad intelligence" as in "faulty bad" or is it "naughty bad"? I choose the latter.

[DemoTex]

14. Rather a bloodless military coup in the US than a MIHOP & Iran attack?

It is, perhaps, an ineluctable alternative. If there is another 9/11-like attack and Bu$h attempts to attack Iran, we will probably be, de facto, under Bu$h-controlled martial law (see PATRIOT Act). A military coup (in the face of Bu$h imposed and controlled martial law) is no more of a constitutional crisis than we face today, and far less of a constitutional and/or international crisis than we will face if Bu$h attacks Iran.

Impeach Bu$h? It is too late. Way too late.

Attack Iran and the US military ground forces in Iraq will face a potentially disastrous retreat-under-fire. Attack Iran and the US Navy fleet in the Persian Gulf will face a potential Trafalgar, with Iran firing Russian-made Sunburn cruise missiles (2.1 Mach) from dug-in positions in the mountains along the Iranian coastline of the Persian Gulf.

Bu$h doesn't seem to "unnerstan'", or care. Dien Bien Phu? Trafalgar? What the hell do they mean to the Bu$hboy? "His Majesty counts for nothing the loss of his ships, provided they are lost with glory" (Napoleon in 1805, prior to losing 4500 men to England's 450 at the Battle of Trafalgar).

[Ghost Dog]

16. Ok you mention Trafalgar (one of many bloody battles)

But please remember there are also many British, Japanese, Australian, Italian, Polish and troops of several other nations presently "peacekeeping", "reconstructing" (and holding oil-fort) in southern Iraq.

[DemoTex]

22. I don't quite get your point, Ghost Dog

Trafalgar and Dien Bien Phu were not used as examples because they were bloody (and they were!), but because blood was wasted as a direct result of arrogance and stupidity (especially DBP). There are some British troops and a few Japanese, Australian, Italian (but not for long), Polish, and other "coalition of the willing" troops in Iraq. The US has many troops in the region (relatively speaking, because there were never enough). But since the coalition's leaders and citizens are (with a couple of exceptions) fed up with the war and with Bu$h, I would expect them to get out of Iraq before a US attack against Iran makes the entire region a killing field.

[Ghost Dog]

23. Well, I guess my point was, as you say here:

"I would expect them to get out of Iraq before a US attack against Iran makes the entire region a killing field." Me too.

Just remember, up to now: you are not alone...

...But maybe you'all learn to cry for non-US people one day?

[DemoTex]

24. Sorry. I understand, now. I agree, too.

We are not alone, indeed. Sorry I misunderstood your original post. The sad thing about "non-US people," in this case, is that most did not want a thing to do with Bu$h's war. It was the leaders that signed the people on to a deadly hitch in a far-off place. I support the non-US troops too, maybe even more. I cannot imaging anything worse than being garrisoned at a godforsaken and lethal outpost with but a handful of my countrymen near. We hear little about the coalition forces, which is the way our Pentagon wants it to be. Too bad. There are some brave troops from those countries you listed. Let's hope that they remain safe and sound, in spite of Bu$h's insane wars.

I hope that they all come home soon. I cry for the Iraqi people, too (like I did for the Vietnamese, when I was there). They did not ask for this hell-on-earth either.

[Ghost Dog]

26. With you there. n/t

[marla101]

17. OH. MY. GAWD!

I can't believe they put this stuff in writing!

This sounds an awful lot like the plan to attack our own ship and blame it on Cuba. What was that called?

How stupid do they think we are?

[yurbud]

19. this wasn't supposed to be released and shortly after this

an air force general was forced into retirement because of an extra-marital affair, something that never happens, especially at his rank.

It's possible he was the source of the leak, or at least a critic within the system.

[Ghost Dog]

21. The U.S.S. Maine:

http://www.smplanet.com/imperialism/remember.html

--> Famous quote: "There is no war," Remington wrote to his boss. "Request to be recalled." Remington's boss, William Randolph Hearst, sent a cable in reply: "Please remain. You furnish the pictures, I'll furnish the war."

[fooj]

20. Will someone...ANYONE...please stop these evil maniacs?

:cry:

[yurbud]

25. won't happen until public is in the streets

too many democrats are cowards or on the take.