Fund Justice / Peace:

It's Free to Join AfterDowningStreet

Take a few seconds to become part of the movement. (If you can't get to the linked page, you are already a member!)

Supporters

Youthology

User login

Navigation

Key Documents

FULL LIST

spam blocker - help fight spam email!

Active forum topics

how to vacate Afghanistan
9 hours 36 min ago
Yes, the House is not in order!
15 hours 49 min ago
Video of Massa
1 day 6 hours ago
War funding.
1 day 17 hours ago
Dallas County DA-Prosecute Bush For Murder
4 days 12 hours ago
justice for bush?
4 days 14 hours ago
Hey Kidz!!! From the "Mouth Of The Beast" Itself . . .Cui Bono?
4 days 17 hours ago
Alan Grayson is one of the richest men in congress and is all...
5 days 13 hours ago
Hey Kidz!!!! Anyone Else Thinking "Pot=Kettle=Black" here? ;-)
5 days 17 hours ago
"we" regular folks don't think of pols as pals;I like BAR
5 days 19 hours ago

Syndicate

Search and Stats

This site gets tons of traffic.

The Clock is Ticking for A US Attack on Iran

Submitted by dlindorff on Sat, 2008-04-26 18:31.

By Dave Lindorff

I admit to feeling a little like the weatherman who keeps saying it's going to rain, and who eventually is proven correct. I feel certain that the Bush/Cheney regime is going to launch a disastrous attack on Iran, but have made several calls, which have been proved wrong, beginning back in October 2006, when I wrote that it looked like several aircraft carrier battle groups were being put in position for the assault, but then it was called off.

Now it looks like the attack is coming soon.

The Washington Post's Ann Scott Tyson is today reporting in an article headlined, Joint Chiefs Chairman Says US Preparing Military Options Against Iran, that Admiral Michael Mullen, the nation's top military officer, thinks the US military is not stretched too thin to take on Iran, and that Iran is becoming an "increasingly lethal and malign influence" in Iraq.

This article comes only a day after a US civilian ship under contract to the US military to deliver supplies to Iraq fired on Iranian boats in the Persian Gulf--just the kind of aggressive action that could lead to an Iranian reaction and trigger a full-blown US response.

The Persian Gulf is now crammed full of US attack ships, ranging from a missile-armed nuclear sub to aircraft carriers packed with tomahawk cruise missiles and fleets of attack aircraft larger than most nation's entire air forces (and also with nuclear weapons).

Other things also point to an attack, most significantly the pushing out of Adm. William Fallon as Central Command chief, and now his replacement by Gen. David Petraeus, who is widely seen as a "political" general who is essentially a yes-man for Bush and Cheney.

I would say the die is cast, and that it awaits only the pretext.

There would be no melodramatic Congressional debate over the reasons for going to war against yet a third nation this time around. Thanks to the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) passed by Congress in October 2001 to authorize the attack on the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Iraq, which Bush and Cheney have illegally and outrageously interpreted as a declaration of a global and unending "War on Terror," the administration is claiming it has the right to attack any nation it defines as "terrorist" at any time, without authorization. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton helped promote war against Iran a few months ago by backing a Senate resolution authored by Sens. Joe Lieberman and Jon Kyle that defined the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a "global terrorist" organization. That was all Bush and Cheney needed, as Clinton, Lieberman and Kyle clearly knew.

In what has to be one of the understatements of the century, Adm. Mullen said he knew that conflict would be "extremely stressing" and "distrous on a number of levels."

Indeed it would. Troops in Iraq are already on their fourth and even fifth rotation, and the "surge" troops in Iraq for the past year are being sent home, not because their job of "stabilizing" Baghdad is done (hardly! violence is increasing!), but because there's nobody left to replace them, and they've been there for 15 brutal months.

Worse yet, oil prices have hit a record $122/barrel and are causing a US and even a global recession--but that figure will be doubled the minute any US attack on Iran begins. This is because war with Iran would immediately bring all oil shipments through the Persian Gulf, which supplies 20-25 percent of the world's oil, to a halt. Even if not one tanker were sunk, no insurer would cover a tanker in that region. Moreover, Iranian sappers, and their allies in Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia, could be expected to take out vulnerable pipelines, refineries and even well-heads in retaliation to any attack.

So an attack on Iran would mean global economic collapse.

Hold on to your hats. I hope I'm proved wrong yet again, but I'm afraid we're in for a bumpy ride. Even if there is no attack, the level of threats against Iran now emanating from the White House and the Pentagon are sufficient to keep driving oil prices skyward.

Americans should look at those pump prices and see Bush's and Cheney's faces in the digital display.

They should also think of the gas they pump as blood, because it is going to be spilled in prodigious quantities if the US goes through with an attack. Not only would countless innocent Iranians be killed by US bombs and rockets and by any radiation released by attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities (the more so if the US or its Israeli ally use nuclear bombs in that attack), but the toll of US military casualties could be expected to soar, as Iran's Shia allies in Iraq predictably turn on American forces in support of Iran.

Clearly this is all madness, but it is also predictable madness. The Bush/Cheney regime is finishing out its last year as the most disastrous, most unpopular, most loathed presidency in the nation's history, and may even be facing criminal prosecution once out of office. It has approached each election since taking office by upping the military jingoism. I see no reason to see their political strategy changing. It is critical to them that John McCain and the Republican Party hang onto the White House, and in their view, getting the US into an all-out war with Iran is just the way to do that.

They may be right.
_______________
DAVE LINDORFF is a Philsadelphia-based journalist and columnist. His latest book is "The Case for Impeachment" (St. Martin's Press, 2006 and now available in paperback). His work is available at www.thiscantbehappening.net

Illegal

Submitted by Nick Egnatz on Sat, 2008-04-26 19:37.

The so-called War on Terror AUMF while perhaps giving Bush leeway to attack countries at his whim does not supercede the UN Charter which according to our Constitution represents the "supreme law of the land". Any attack on Iran will be illegal without authorization from the U.N. Security Council, just as the Iraq invasion was. Of course our meek Congress will go along with the President and that will make them criminals also. This is what not impeaching Bush and Cheney has made us vulnerable to.
Nick Egnatz
NW Indiana Veterans for Peace

Attacking Iran

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 2008-04-26 19:44.

I agree, everything points to Bush?Cheney launching ANOTHER illegal and unprovoked war.

Just know it probably wont happen until after June as General Electric (the 3rd largest weapons manufacturer and owner of NBC) still has business in Iran and wont be out until the end of June.

I think you were right on before and may have helped prevent

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 2008-04-26 20:25.

the attacks you predicted. This one looks set to roll, though, no matter what. I hope I'm wrong. But I expect some very ultimatumish rhetoric from the administration this week, and the attack soon after that. The results are almost certain to be horrendous, even if the US achieves total dominance immediately - deaths in Iran could be on a scale worse than Iraq, as hard to imagine as that is.

And what many folks are not considering is that our own Navy could come under heavy attack from Iran's Sunburn missles, which - if what I have read is true - are specifically designed to attack US ships, such that US ships are defenseless against them. The Persian Gulf could become a shooting barrell if US forces don't manage to take out the missles first, and if it does become a shooting barrell, that's OUR people on those ships. Our fellow citizens.

And then there's Russia and China. I don't care what the socalled experts say, Russia and China are not so deeply committed to our economy that they are going to be willing to let our military take over their backyard in Central Asia. Iran would be a giant bite out of that backyard, and both Russia and China have to know that it wouldn't be the last one.

I just can't see this attack on Iran as anything but the sheerest insanity - but it MIGHT win the November elections for the Republican Party, and sometimes I think that's all they ever really think about.

US vs. Iran = US vs. Russia, China and the World

Submitted by channing on Sun, 2008-04-27 00:51.

Don't feel bad at all Dave, being a weatherman is intrinsically variable, but I want to add my 2 cents.

Russia made it quite clear last summer that an attack on any Caspian Basin nation would be an attack on Russia itself. This in the context of the announcement of the security partnership. Two things I noticed around the same time. One was that about the same time as the Security Partnership announcement, the NIE that had been delayed since the previous December began cropping up, like, "we must release this as it is" pressure on the WH to stop attempting interference. The other was the IAEA clearing Iran of charges of weapons development.

It became obvious to the Russians that PNAC had Iran firmly in their sights and would be willing and able to deliver any kind of False-Flag trigger to proceed. Remember last April 6th? The Russians played "weatherman" about two weeks before that announcing the US was intending a False-Flag for around the week of April 6th in order to provoke an invasion. That was shortly after all those Carriers started hovering off the coast. I've come to believe Russia, in playing weatherman at the time they did actually prevented the attack. So first off, you're in good company at least in my eyes. It was also about this time (I believe) Russia went to the Iran and the IAEA and personally-guaranteed that Iran needed no nuclear weapon development because Russia had Iran's back. That's how the IAEA came out so strong on it.

And here's where the Missing Nukes story comes in. What was Cheney waiting for in holding up the NIE? The insiders I read about were of the belief that Cheney merely held up the issue because it was so damaging to their agenda, but what if it was the case that losing nukes was actually the reason? To this day, I haven't heard any convincing evidence that the discrepancy between the reported "6" weapons that left Minot and the reported "5" that were recovered was ever settled, and regardless, 5 or 6 nuclear weapons almost disappeared from Barksdale. It was after this world-shaking mishap that Russia began airing interviews with top generals and intelligence officials that, yes, Russia was prepared to use nukes if provoked, and even to use them "preemptively" in the right situation... Coincidence?

Now add to this several new major energy deals China, Russia and India made with Iran since the nuke story and a new Public Confidence Iran has been showing the world ever since. These deals aren't the kind that super-nations make with one another when there is serious questions about military volatility or unstable delivery infrastructure. I read that the bald-faced-aggression Cheney-PNAC showed in the missing nuke story woke up the world. Also remember these vital nation's intelligence agencies are aware that 911 was a False-Flag, but as long as it was only being used for Saddam and a pipeline, it wouldn't directly threaten them, they simply drew lines in the sand. That line in the sand became glaring red after the nuke story.

Now as to why I believe all this military posturing against Iran is being carried out has more to do with the elections. First, it always helps tyrants when they further scare people into submission. But they already know too many Americans are on to their use of fear. Since not one candidate is Vowing to take on the Inside components of 911, they have essentially "gotten away" with it. No matter who becomes president among this current crop, the militaristic shadow arm of the CIA/DoD and their accomplices in Pakistan, Israel, Saudi Arabia etc., will retain virtually all their current powers, and another False-Flag, more believable than previous ones, will be given to that president in an "I Told You So" slap at peace-nicks. If Obama gets in, they will blame his "altruistic naivete", if it's Hillary, it will be, "Aren't You Glad You Elected a Neocon?" In other words, they're posturing or going back under-cover like they've done for the past 5-6 decades, only now they have twice the money, weapons and connections than before, so 911 pt.2 will happen, probably centered on Pakistan.

I want you to be wrong, so I'm biased perhaps. But I dread the martial law etc., that will come to this nation and the world-wide rioting/looting/barbarism that will occur if I'm wrong.

Keep up the reports, they're very important.

ixoxi

Why does everyone assume no hostile A-bombs in the USA?

Submitted by jbpazz on Sun, 2008-04-27 11:15.

jbpazz Everyone knows the USA is a rogue nation run by madmen. Since 1996 the FBI and the State Department have sold nuclear secrets to the highest bidder. Who is to say some of the deals were not for hardware?
Most convenient are suitcase atom bombs, which can go as airline luggage. For less than $1 billion an interested party could embed 50 such devices in as many cities.
If done with discretion, the Americans might never know who did it. Without a target for revenge, the USA might develop a more constructive attitude.

I do not assume mainland US will not be a/the target

Submitted by channing on Sun, 2008-04-27 18:27.

Your point is well taken. One problem, however, is weapons-grade fuel which is monitored around the globe along with the source material by competing nations... everybody and their brother is scrutinizing it. It's the single most monitored activity and resource in the world. In addition, these suitcase weapons require the most advanced research and technical/machining facilities in the world to produce. This isn't an easily hidden operation. Delivering your scenario of 50 in 50 different states is virtually impossible without detection.

Now, considering that the US military will very quickly become near-obsolete should a scenario like yours occur here because of crippled manufacturing and skill losses, (airports and industrial zones surrounding them) the designers of such an attack could not afford it unless the intention is to abandon the US mainland altogether and the fallout would carry the world over leaving no place to hide. Possible? yes. Realistic Plan? no.

Besides, the world does not need nukes to defeat the US, just economic isolation in a slow but steady move away from our currency and everything made here... this is happening already and guess what... we're losing ground fast.

There is one way to correct this problem: Public Exposure of the 9/11 False-Flag and its corporate and PNAC accomplices. This one forensic investigation/prosecution will tie most of the core problems together in one bundle to be thrown into the pit of hell where it came from. When a majority of Americans realize the truth, we will restore many of the fundamental principles that made us an example of Liberty and Justice for All, and the world will be rid of some of the most murderous schemers in history. A new transparency of Federal activity. A renewed commitment to corporate oversight. A new realization that we solved the energy-environmental crisis already with Solar Deserts by getting big-oil, big-nuke, big-coal, out of the way.

ixoxi

Cheney is looking for a pretext for war, that's clear.

Submitted by TomJoad on Sun, 2008-04-27 02:05.

It is Not in dispute. Much of this administration must go to bed at night praying for some escalation of the conflict, giving them the perfect opening for war.

Just look at the words of John Bolton, who was Cheney's choice for the UN post. Speaking to his friends at AIPAC.
He hoped that Iran would kick out weapons inspectors.
http://stopaipac.org/boltontape.htm
This is from January 5th, 2007:
Let me turn now to the question of Iran and what I think the situation is there. The Security Council just passed a resolution. The resolution that the Security Council passed at the end of last month imposing certain limited sanctions on Iran, obviously the product of a long effort based on Iran’s refusal to comply with the earlier Security Council resolution that gave them until August 31st to cease their uranium enrichment activities. I’d have to say because I’m a private citizen and therefore a free man again, and these are my personal views, now, that this sanctions resolution is very disappointing. It is not as tough as I would have liked to have seen it. In many respects the Russians did an outstanding job from their point of view in protecting Iran, in narrowing the scope of the sanctions, in limiting the effectiveness, I think, of many of the things that we wanted to try and do to prevent the Iranians from continuing to make progress on their nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

I think the Iranian reaction to the sanctions resolution has been very telling in that respect, although they’ve passed a resolution in parliament to re-evaluate their relation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, they have not rejected the sanctions resolution, they have not done anything more dramatic, such as withdrawing from the nonproliferation treaty, or throwing out inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which I actually hoped they would do – that that kind of reaction would produce a counter-reaction that actually would be more beneficial to us.

Despite that, i hope that sanity will prevail, and that there are enough relatively sane people left in positions of power that will create enough obstacles to prevent an attack. That along with massive public resistance to such an attack and the current Occupation of Iraq.