Red Lines in the Iranian Sand--surprise nuke attack on Iran??

[Gloria]

From the new World Media Watch up now at http://www.zianet.com/insightanalytical
Tomorrow at Buzzflash.com

1//Asia Times Online, Hong Kong Jan 13, 2005

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HA13Ak02.html



RED LINES IN THE IRANIAN SAND

By Praful Bidwai

SNIP

A former Indian intelligence officer, Vikram Sood, said that such an attack might use nuclear weapons. "A conventional attack on Iran would be expensive and not quite cost-effective. It would allow Iranian retaliation." To preempt retaliation, the US might use tactical nuclear weapons against Iran's underground facilities.

"The tragedy unfolding," said Sood, "is that if the US believes that its adversary possesses or has the intention to possess WMD , then it is justified to consider this a threat to itself and to US forces in the region. It must, therefore, act preemptively. The fear also is that unlike in the case of Iraq when considerable time was spent in building the case, this time the attack will be sudden and actual justifications will be given later."

Any such attack would break the 60-year-old, very welcome, taboo against the use of nuclear weapons - with extraordinarily negative consequences for global peace and security.

Such an outcome can only be prevented if the West moves away from coercive diplomacy to isolate Iran and opens serious talks with it, and if the nuclear weapons states rethink their own policies.

As the West accuses Iran of nursing nuclear ambitions, it has itself no intention of reducing nuclear arms. The US has embarked on a plan to expand its nuclear capability both upward, through "Star Wars", and downward, through bunker-buster bombs. Similarly, Britain has announced a $40 billion replacement project for the Trident missile.

Smaller nuclear states such as Israel, India and Pakistan have set negative examples.

[yurbud]

1. they will have to fake a nuke terrorist attack here to make it work

and I don't see the military and CIA cooperating

[bananas]

5. nah - it's a pre-emptive strike

They got away with a pre-emptive war (Iraq),
so the precedent has been set.
In retaliation there will be a nuclear event here.
Nuclear power plants will become terrorist targets.

[yurbud]

10. 9/11 was how they got public approval for Iraq, so though it was sold as

pre-emptive (which it wasn't anyway--Iraq couldn't threaten us with a handful of nukes) people saw it as another response to 9/11, which is how Cheney and Bush sold it.

[bananas]

11. One morning Bush will hold a press conference

saying that we just nuked a dozen sites in Iran.
Mission Accomplished.

[yurbud]

25. I think even Bushies are capable of thinking a short distance into the....

future or we would already have a draft and be in Iran.

[bananas]

26. It goes like this

Bush: "God told me we need more troops! Time for a draft!"
Karl: "No, God told you we don't need a draft, we need a photo-op!"
Bush: "Huh, Ok, God told me I need a photo-op! Bring it on!"

edit: I left out the part where Bush gets a nasty bruise on his face again.

[stop the bleeding]

28. for serious research and discussions on this please check out these

threads. There is a treasure trove of info in these threads and BTW I have put links to this thread as part of these.

Enjoy!


PLAME= IRAN/CONTRA REDUX - Planted WMD from Ghorbanifar & Ledeen.



Ledeen, Ghorbanifar, and the strategy of tension





Biden tells Couric 2X's that *'s Lawyers are agrguing over whether the WH needs Congressional approval to declare war on Iran

Several of the individual responses are worth of bookmarks on their own and infact some of these responses should be their own research threads.

[bananas]

29. thanks nt

[Deja Q]

2. Will neighboring nations tolerate that, even if Iran is a big danger?

I don't deny Iran is a problem... but nuclear weapons, even "tactical" ones, could have severe ramifications - and atoms don't stop at the border either!

[sweetheart]

18. that's how world war 3 turns to world war 4

When a radiation cloud kills a million russians or pakistanis.

If you play a scenario wargame like command and conquor generals, the
enemy will build and attack you with superweapons as fast as they can
develop and pay for them. Your only defense is to either build your
entire economy to survive continuous ongoing WMD attacks, or to build
a precision WMD yourself and destroy their's before they launch them.

But the operative word there is "launch". Why? Well, in military terms,
the work it takes to get it ready for launch is many times that of simply
diddling around in the lab. At that point, the enemy has invested the
most resources, and committed the most strategic value to the success of that
weapon. If they really are an enemy, and are planning to attack, taking out
their primary attack weapon on the eve of the attack "ends" the war.

Bombing it early on does not end a war at all, but merely takes the gloves off
for anyone in the world to use a WMD in retaliation, and say 4 nukes were to
hit iran, then unless the US accepted 4 random nulcear attacks on its own cities,
the world would launch an all out nuclear attack on the US and destroy all the
cities.... if the US wants to play "eye for an eye" in a pre-biblical world, the
blindness will be endarkening indeed.

So then, the only diplomatic way to attack, is to form a giant alliance,
including russia and pakistan, perhaps ideally getting russia to launch the
nuclear attack, so that the costs when the clouds drift over its own soil,
in terms of millions civilian dead, that those costs won't prompt it to
launch a volley at the US... so then, it must be a collaborative nuclear attack.

So, for all the hubub, likely some heavy economic sanctions, but it seems iran
is willing to pay the price for what it sees as self determination on its own
soil... and geez, considering our forefathers fought for the same thing, to
not respect the iranian's right to their own second amendment is absurd. They
are not a sovereign threat to the USA; the only reason we discuss them is
because of the imperialist who are conquoring the world, who have declared
the US borders to be global, and challenge all comers to take their best shot.

We're back to MAD, and for a generation that has not lived under that acronym,
it is the ultimate terrorism to threaten your own population with WMD attacks
in retaliation for launching your own WMD terrorism.

[okieinpain]

3. if we nuke iran, al-zaqari, osama, and any other nut out there will

have all of the suicide bombers they could want to the end of time. and to be truthfully honest I think the iranians all ready have some type of nuclear bomb. I'm also sure they have all they plants that they need to bring oil production through out the region to it's knees.

americans can be so fucking ignorant.

[seemslikeadream]

4. Administration lawyers argue president has right to goto war in Iran tomo

Senator Biden says

"This administration's Lawyers argue that president has the right to go to war in Iran, tomorrow without even telling the US Congress, that is what they argue Katie" this was said the second time.


http://video.msn.com/v/us/v.htm?,

Type in Biden in search

Watch this video

Sen. Biden discusses Alito hearings


Biden tells Couric 2X's that Bush and his lawyers have argued that they have the authority to declare war on Iran without telling Congress.


Thanks to stop the bleeding

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=117625&mesg_id=117625

[stop the bleeding]

19. this is a very interesting section here

All this might only frustrate US efforts to diplomatically isolate Iran," said Qamar Agha, a Middle East expert at the Center for West and Central Asian Studies at the Jamia Millia Islamia university in New Delhi. "Western Europe is far too dependent upon Iran's oil and gas to go to extreme lengths in sustaining sanctions that cripple Iran's energy generation. Therefore, the US might be tempted to use military force, jointly with Israel, to bomb select facilities in Iran."

In recent weeks, US Central Intelligence Agency director Porter Goss visited Turkey and briefed a number of other states in Iran's neighborhood on US plans for attacking Iran. Israel has already declared that Iran's nuclear program "can be destroyed".

The German magazine Der Spiegel wrote that Goss had asked Turkey to provide unfettered exchange of intelligence that could help with a mission to attack Iran. It also reported that the governments of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Oman and Pakistan had been informed in recent weeks of Washington's military plans.

And Israel's Likud Party leader Benjamin Netanyahu has nostalgically invoked his country's 1981 attack on Iraq's experimental nuclear reactor under construction.

Also wordpix is the one who pointed out the Biden thing in the Biden thread in LBN, but I verified with the help of soonerhoosier then I just put it together to try and get the word out. I still don't see it here yet. Also I still have yet to read you vast treasure trove of research over in RP's Plame Redux thread but it is bookmarked. Last night I spent a couple of hours going over The AMERICAN JUDAS paper which I am sure you have read, and then I was trying to get a good review of the whole thread and had to stop when I got to your part. We are all doing awesome work, I just wonder what we would be doing if things weren't so corrupt. But I guess that is the way of the world.


K&R! to the poster

[killbotfactory]

6. If our country preemptively uses nukes, who will tolerate it?

I certainly won't.

[Toots]

23. They have to use nukes

If they don't then it might turn out there were no Nuclear activities going on. No WMDs in other words and Bush* can't go through that again. If they use nukes there will be no way to tell from radiation levels if the radiation is from their nuclear activity or our nukes. It is a win win situation for Bush* and no one on the face of the earth will challenge him. We will slaughter a half million Persians for Bush* to save face from Iraq...No wonder the world LOVES America these days......

[DBoon]

7. US attacks Iran

US will lose

[and-justice-for-all]

8. Bush = WWIII

This wack job is going to get us all killed. And the funny thing EVERYONE knows that him and his goons are BAD! But, no one seems to give a shit..No one with the authority to do anything about it. HE NEEDS IMPEACHED NOW!!

I am ready to move to Iceland, a nice Island in the middle of no-where. Finland might be safe too...

No one seems to want Peace either, we can even exist in harmony because some DUMBASS, that some really stupid people voted for put into office. Why? because of religious reasons, Prophecy bullshit...
Good Example, Pat Roberts and his dealings with Isael and outlandish contributions to Christian and Jewish settlements. Christian Cults have BOUGHT their way into the area because everytime they would send a Crusade or inquisition in the Muslims would kick their ass. So now, with the ALL MIGHTY Dollar they have PAID for their presence in that area. Someone needs to tell Pat Roberts to shut the fuck up and keep his god damn hands out of things he is only going to make worse.

40Billion on a new Missle program, way to go Britian. Its now obvious that you have NO interest in a Peace process but hunger for War..Boy, bet all these Warmongering has Hitler and Stalin dancing in their graves.

The people with all the power have absolutly no fucking clue what the hell they are doing and we are all going to pay with our lives...

[peacetalksforall]

9. What way does the wind blow - will fall-out contaminate our kids? And

the beautiful people of Iran? Ever wonder if these Republican radicals ever travelled outside the country? Ever met a foreigner? Ever sent a card saying Peace On Earth?

Disgusted in the U.S. of Corporations.

Is anyone going to say when Iran could have weapons ready - is it really 10 years from now? What's the hurry? What's the truth?

Will any peacemaker step forward?

Do you want more people to die?

Do you love bombs?

Will we see disfigurations? Or will they cover that up?

Will Doctors Without Borders rush there to help?

Bitter in the U.S. of Corporations.

[anitar1]

12. I don't think Putin would approve of a move like this.

Who knows what Bfee might sow with such an action?

[Zynx]

13. Wow, quoting a former Indian intelligence officer. Great relevent source.

Crap article.

[bananas]

14. atimes and ips have been pretty reliable.

they've done a lot of good reporting.

[Zynx]

15. The nuke idea is being generated by one highly dubious "expert."

Finding some retired, low rank Indian intelligence officer for the most inflammatory idea possible is extremely bad journalism. You might as well ask a random man on the street "hey, could the US nuke Iran?"

[bananas]

16. He was head of RAW

neither "low rank" nor "a random man on the street".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_and_Analysis_Wing
Vikram Sood, 2001-2003, 14th Director

[bananas]

17. He didn't generate the nuke idea

It's been discussed for a while, maybe you missed it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/14/AR2005051400071.html

Not Just A Last Resort?
A Global Strike Plan, With a Nuclear Option

By William Arkin

Sunday, May 15, 2005; Page B01

Early last summer, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld approved a top secret "Interim Global Strike Alert Order" directing the military to assume and maintain readiness to attack hostile countries that are developing weapons of mass destruction, specifically Iran and North Korea.

<snip>

[stop the bleeding]

20. kicking for awareness and discussion

[Loonman]

21. Not an option; escalation would be inevitable if US used nukes

Iran is a big Russian client state, they'd lob ICBMs at us, we'd shoot Minutemen at them.

Then it's adios muchachos, for all of us.

[Junkdrawer]

22. Both sides of the conflict are motivated to be unreasonable...

The hardliners in Iran stay in power only so long as the average Iranian perceives a US threat.

The Republicans are positioned to lose the midterms in the US unless there's a major conflict.

This is how World Wars start. :scared:

[Silverhair]

24. No Way. NT

[CornField]

27. Bush meet Pandora's Box

This is so bad I don't even want to consider it.

[0007]

30. L.A. Times doesn't paint a pretty picture.

[moondust]

31. Another Bush mess.

Here's your PDB, George: Iran was liberalizing and moderating until an old enemy misled by some wacky hardliners with imperialist ideas got unnecessarily aggressive right next door. To guard against that aggression Iran reversed course and put their own wacky hardliners back in charge. Now talk is of nukes and wiping Israel off the map.

Didn't you double bogey that last hole?