Tech Support Guy banner

Is Iran Next After Iraq!

175216 Views 5049 Replies 122 Participants Last post by  bassetman
I guess some troops will be pulled out of Iraq if this comes to fruition! :eek: I can't help but see how Bush is further alienating us from the world...making America the country to hate! :( Following right along the book of Revelations....I hope and pray along the same lines that Bush realizes sometime before it's too late..that China and Russia are not our "friends"!

Journalist: U.S. planning for possible attack on Iran
White House says report is 'riddled with inaccuracies
'
Sunday, January 16, 2005 Posted: 9:23 PM EST (0223 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Bush administration has been carrying out secret reconnaissance missions to learn about nuclear, chemical and missile sites in Iran in preparation for possible airstrikes there, journalist Seymour Hersh said Sunday.

The effort has been under way at least since last summer, Hersh said on CNN's "Late Edition."

In an interview on the same program, White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett said the story was "riddled with inaccuracies."

"I don't believe that some of the conclusions he's drawing are based on fact," Bartlett said.

Iran has refused to dismantle its nuclear program, which it insists is legal and is intended solely for civilian purposes.

Hersh said U.S. officials were involved in "extensive planning" for a possible attack -- "much more than we know."

"The goal is to identify and isolate three dozen, and perhaps more, such targets that could be destroyed by precision strikes and short-term commando raids
," he wrote in "The New Yorker" magazine, which published his article in editions that will be on newsstands Monday.

Hersh is a veteran journalist who was the first to write about many details of the abuses of prisoners Abu Ghraib in Baghdad.

He said his information on Iran came from "inside" sources who divulged it in the hope that publicity would force the administration to reconsider
.

"I think that's one of the reasons some of the people on the inside talk to me," he said.

Hersh said the government did not answer his request for a response before the story's publication, and that his sources include people in government whose information has been reliable in the past.

Hersh said Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld view Bush's re-election as "a mandate to continue the war on terrorism," despite problems with the U.S.-led war in Iraq.

Last week, the effort to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq -- the Bush administration's stated primary rationale for the war -- was halted after having come up empty.

The secret missions in Iran, Hersh said, have been authorized in order to prevent similar embarrassment in the event of military action there.

"The planning for Iran is going ahead even though Iraq is a mess," Hersh said. "I think they really think there's a chance to do something in Iran, perhaps by summer, to get the intelligence on the sites
."

He added, "The guys on the inside really want to do this."

Hersh identified those inside people as the "neoconservative" civilian leadership in the Pentagon. That includes Rumsfeld, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and Undersecretary of Defense Doug Feith -- "the sort of war hawks that we talk about in connection with the war in Iraq."

And he said the preparation goes beyond contingency planning and includes detailed plans for air attacks:

"The next step is Iran. It's definitely there. They're definitely planning ... But they need the intelligence first."

Emphasizing 'diplomatic initiatives'

Bartlett said the United States is working with its European allies to help persuade Iran not to pursue nuclear weapons.

Asked if military action is an option should diplomacy fail, Bartlett said, "No president at any juncture in history has ever taken military options off the table."

But Bush "has shown that he believes we can emphasize the diplomatic initiatives that are under way right now," he said.

Hersh said U.S. officials believe that a U.S. attack on Iran might provoke an uprising by Iranians against the hard-line religious leaders who run the government. Similar arguments were made ahead of the invasion of Iraq, when administration officials predicted U.S. troops would be welcomed as liberators.

And Hersh said administration officials have chosen not to include conflicting points of view in their deliberations -- such as predictions that any U.S. attack would provoke a wave of nationalism that would unite Iranians against the United States.

"As people say to me, when it comes to meetings about this issue, if you don't drink the Kool-Aid, you can't go to meetings," he said. "That isn't a message anybody wants to hear."

The plans are not limited to Iran, he said.

"The president assigned a series of findings and executive orders authorizing secret commando groups and other special forces units to conduct covert operations against suspected terrorist targets in as many as 10 nations in the Middle East and South Asia," he wrote.

Under the secret plans, the war on terrorism would be led by the Pentagon, and the power of the CIA would be reduced, Hersh wrote in his article.

"It's sort of a great victory for Donald Rumsfeld, a bureaucratic victory
," Hersh told CNN.

He said: "Since the summer of 2002, he's been advocating, 'Let me run this war, not the CIA. We can do it better. We'll send our boys in. We don't have to tell their local military commanders. We don't have to tell the ambassadors. We don't have to tell the CIA station chiefs in various countries. Let's go in and work with the bad guys and see what we can find out.'"

Hersh added that the administration has chipped away at the CIA's power and that newly appointed CIA Director Porter Goss has overseen a purge of the old order.

"He's been committing sort-of ordered executions'" Hersh said. "He's been -- you know, people have been fired, they've been resigning."

The target of the housecleaning at the CIA, he said, has been intelligence analysts, some of whom are seen as "apostates -- as opposed to being true believers."
See less See more
Status
Not open for further replies.
5041 - 5050 of 5050 Posts
LANMaster said:
'America Is Like a Battery Running Out. They Are Done For.'

Airing on Iranian television May 24, 2007, four days before the US-Iranian meeting, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad tells a huge crowd that America is “like a battery running out,” the “Zionist regime” will soon be “eradicated,” and Iran is nearly ready to “take complete advantage of all nuclear capabilities.”

Watch the video here
They were probably talking about Bush! :D
Oh look...another part of the future of the U.S. forming...our good buddy Russia...
...
I thought Bush looked into his eyes and saw his soul? :rolleyes: ;)
As i understand it, Iran is enriching uranium at a 3.6 percent range and is boasting about 4.0.
That's not enough for weapons, but enough for power plants. Our own government said last year that Iran was probably 8 to 12 years away from producing the 80 percent stuff. And, the last I read, was that their infrastructure is severely lacking in maintenance. Although I don't think the Iranian government is a nice 'guy', they aren't ready for military nuclear power any time soon. (And you have to remember that this administration has been using 'fear' since day one...)
ekim68 said:
As i understand it, Iran is enriching uranium at a 3.6 percent range and is boasting about 4.0.
That's not enough for weapons, but enough for power plants. Our own government said last year that Iran was probably 8 to 12 years away from producing the 80 percent stuff. And, the last I read, was that their infrastructure is severely lacking in maintenance. Although I don't think the Iranian government is a nice 'guy', they aren't ready for military nuclear power any time soon. (And you have to remember that this administration has been using 'fear' since day one...)
:up:
Psychological warfare between the US and Iran
Article here.

There are intriguing new developments in the psychological warfare going on between the United States and Iran.

-- Tom
Thanks Tom!
A little off-topic.

Economist: US, Iran Low on Peace Index

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The United States and Iran finished in a virtual dead heat, and way down the list, in a magazine's assessment of the peacefulness of 121 countries.

The United States placed 96th and Iran came in 97th on the global index released Wednesday by the Economist magazine.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Peace-Index.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
In the absence of any real evidence, still, we're supposed to take foreboding of Armageddon into consideration ... some here are back on the 'Iran is a threat' wagon .... well, I don't know about that ... :D

I'm not saying they will but suppose for a moment that Iran does get their grubby little hands on the bomb.

A top military advisor from Israel, Martin van Creveld, has recently talked about that scenario. Don't know if anyone here has heard much about the guy before, but apparently he's top notch, and knows a lot about these things, and he's so "world renowned" among military strategists that his many books are "required reading for the U.S. Army officers" (Wiki does have a page on the guy).

Anyway, to cut this shorter, in a recent interview van Creveld said:
"We Israelis have what it takes to deter an Iranian attack. We are in no danger at all of having an Iranian nuclear weapon dropped on us.
This part is worth repeating and rebolding, but let's say instead that he says that Israel needs NOT to fear them even if Iranians had the nukes (which they don't). He then goes on to say:
We cannot say so too openly, however, because we have a history of using any threat in order to get weapons. And it works beautifully: Thanks to Iranian threat, we are getting weapons from U.S. and Germany .

I think some people in Israel are deliberately exaggerating our fears because it prompts the response, "Oh, those poor Jews. They're going to have the Holocaust again. Give them weapons"
Wow, them there statements right there go to motive, eh?

Now remember who said this! ... and then see how many, or if any, of the MSM actually showed/reprinted his latest comments. Lastly, if Israel does not fear Iran with nukes why should the U.S. be concerned about their things nuclear?

Although there's a page from the magazine interview from which the quotes came (June's issue), on the net somewhere, I don't have a direct link to it ... you could try Googling Playboy though
(I said Googling! ... not ogling!! ;) )
See less See more
This thread has exceeded 5000 posts...reply to new thread here! :) Thanks! :)
angelize56 said:
This thread has exceeded 5000 posts...reply to new thread here! :) Thanks! :)
Ummm thank you I think! ;)
5041 - 5050 of 5050 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top