Sunday's Telegraph UK: Will President Bush Bomb Iran?

[Hissyspit]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/02/wiran102.xml

Will President Bush bomb Iran?
By Tim Shipman in Washington
Last Updated: 12:17am BST 02/09/2007Page 1 of 3

In a nondescript room, two blocks from the American Capitol building, a group of Bush administration staffers is gathered to consider the gravest threat their government has faced this century: the testing of a nuclear weapon by Iran.

The United States, no longer prepared to tolerate the risk that Iranian nuclear weapons will be used against Israel, or passed to terrorists, has already launched a bombing campaign to destroy known Iranian nuclear sites, air bases and air defence sites. Iran has retaliated by cutting off oil to America and its allies, blockading the Straits of Hormuz, the Persian Gulf bottleneck, and sanctioned an uprising by Shia militias in southern Iraq that has shut down 60 per cent of Iraq's oil exports.

The job of the officials from the Pentagon, the State Department, and the Departments of Homeland Security and Energy, who have gathered in an office just off Massachusetts Avenue, behind the rail terminus, Union Station, is to prevent a spike in oil prices that will pitch the world's economy into a catastrophic spin.

The good news is that this was a war game; for those who fear war with Iran, the less happy news is that the officials were real. The simulation, which took four months, was run by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank with close links to the White House. Its conclusions, drawn up last month and seen by The Sunday Telegraph, have been passed on to military and civilian planners charged with drawing up plans for confronting Iran.

News that elements of the American government are working in earnest on how to deal with the fallout of an attack on Iran come at a tense moment.

On Tuesday, President Bush dramatically stepped up his war of words with the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whom the US government accuses of overseeing a covert programme to develop nuclear weapons. In a speech to war veterans, Mr Bush said: "Iran's active pursuit of technology that could lead to nuclear weapons threatens to put a region already known for instability and violence under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust."

He went on to condemn Iranian meddling in Iraq, where America increasingly blames the deaths of its soldiers on Iranian bombs and missiles. Mr Bush made clear that he had authorised military commanders to confront "Iran's murderous activities". This was widely taken to mean that he is set on a confrontation with Iran that will culminate in a bombing campaign to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities, just as Israel bombed Saddam Hussein's Osirak reactor in 1981.

MORE

[Middle finga]

1. What I don't understand is; if the international community know that

an attack on Iran will send the world economy into a catastrophic spin, then why are they sitting back on their asses and allowing it to happen, why wont they get together an issue a warning to Bush because if they're thinking the american sheeple and the congress is going to stop bush they are kidding themselves.

[gordianot]

2. The ruling class has either lost their minds or they have just decided to shake us up,

They appear to embrace much larger dangerous wars and seem determined to reduce world population. Welfare of large groups of people foreign or domestic is not the goal of those who are now wielding power.

I do have some hope the Military will eventually just say "No". Alexander Haig was sent to watch Nixon, I wonder who is watching the current crop of criminals?

[Adsos Letter]

3. I'm surprised...

that they didn't include an oil shut-off by Venezuela as part of the plan; couldn't Chavez begin marketing all his oil to China or India? Whay would THAT do to the American economy? Would we just attack Venezuelan oil infrastructure in response?
It's no wonder to me why countries like China & Russia aren't screaming about it...Iraq is America's Vietnam, Russia's Afghanistan and Chechnya all rolled into one...

Just writing off-the-cuff, and haven't read the rest of the Telegraph article, so flame away at my ignorance...

ON EDIT: okaaaay...so now I read the article...would this involve domestic governmaental economic controls aka FDR's administration during WWII? I'm...suspiscious...that the AEI think-tank has managed to convince themselves that the negatives are manageable...although I would point out that, while Sarkozy makes apoint of saying that France has no intention of bombing Iran, they DO have a carrier in the region and could take over air-asset CG defense, etc. in order to allow US and Israeli forces to do the bombing...I have no doubt the US could manage to keep the Straits of Hormuz pretty-much functioning, but how much oil is Iraq pumping now anyway? And what would stop the Chinese from slipping a couple of tactical nukes to the Iranians; that would make pretty quick work of any CGs out there...

OK...still off-the-cuff...feel free to educate me; I make no claims to knowledge or wisdom in this area.


:popcorn:

[Hissyspit]

4. .

[intaglio]

5. This quote scares me- not just for the sense in which it is used

News that elements of the American government are working in earnest on how to deal with the fallout of an attack on Iran come at a tense moment.

If an attack is made on the nuclear facilities the "Fallout" will be radioactive and will poison millions