Courtesy of the British conservative newspaper The Telegraph, more drum beating for a military attack against Iran by US forces in the Persian Gulf:
Senior American intelligence and defence officials believe that President George W Bush and his inner circle are taking steps to place America on the path to war with Iran, The Sunday Telegraph has learnt.
Pentagon planners have developed a list of up to 2,000 bombing targets in Iran, amid growing fears among serving officers that diplomatic efforts to slow Iran’s nuclear weapons programme are doomed to fail.
Pentagon and CIA officers say they believe that the White House has begun a carefully calibrated programme of escalation that could lead to a military showdown with Iran.
Now it has emerged that Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state, who has been pushing for a diplomatic solution, is prepared to settle her differences with Vice-President Dick Cheney and sanction military action. […]
Under the theory – which is gaining credence in Washington security circles – US action would provoke a major Iranian response, perhaps in the form of moves to cut off Gulf oil supplies, providing a trigger for air strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities and even its armed forces.
Senior officials believe Mr Bush’s inner circle has decided he does not want to leave office without first ensuring that Iran is not capable of developing a nuclear weapon. […]
A State Department source familiar with White House discussions said that Miss Rice, under pressure from senior counter-proliferation officials to acknowledge that military action may be necessary, is now working with Mr Cheney to find a way to reconcile their positions and present a united front to the President.
The source said: “When you go down there and see the body language, you can see that Cheney is still The Man. Condi pushed for diplomacy but she is no dove. If it becomes necessary she will be on board.
If Bush is trying to bluff Iran I don’t think it’s working. If he is trying to gin up enough support for another war among the American people, it isn’t working, either. If, however, his purpose is to cow the Democrats in Congress into letting him get away with another preemptive war crime, well …
Ps. How can diplomatic efforts be doomed to fail when Iran has just agreed to a deal with the IAEA regarding its nuclear program? What, pray tell, diplomatic efforts has the US tried other than demanding more and more sanctions from the UN? It certainly hasn’t engaged Iran directly, nor has it supported IAEA chief ElBaradei in his efforts to increase inspections of Iran’s program. In short, the argument that diplomatic efforts are doomed is a shibboleth. The only party who wants them to fail is the Bush administration, and its new conservative ally in the EU, France.
The world should “prepare for war” with Iran, the French foreign minister has said, significantly escalating tensions over the country’s nuclear programme.
Bernard Kouchner said that while “we must negotiate right to the end” with Iran, if Teheran possessed an atomic weapon it would represent “a real danger for the whole world”.
The world should “prepare for the worst… which is war”, he said.
The insanity will only get worse, my friends. And don’t expect the Bushies to consult with Congress once Bush elects to use his “Decider” powers to attack Iran:
(cont.)
Asked if President George W Bush would consult Congress before launching any strikes on Iran, [US Defence Secretary] Gates said he would not be drawn on “hypotheticals”.
Hypotheticals? Like Article I, Section 8, Clause 11, of the Constitution?
The Congress shall have Power …
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
Nice to know the Congress’ power to declare war is only hypothetical in the eyes of the Bush administration, whereas the President’s power is, well, that of a King. Funny, but I thought our forefather and mothers fought a revolution to free ourselves from the despotic rule of a single man. How silly of me. Once again, 9/11 changed everything.
By the way, does anyone doubt that the Bush White House, through either incompetence or active intention, has done more to advance the cause of nuclear proliferation than any other administration since the development of nuclear weapons in 1945?
Thanks Steven.
And does the US media report this headline:
UN nuclear boss warns warmongers over Iran
It’s on top in The Guardian
(I already posted this reference in the newsbucket)
The US media is more concerned with Brittney Spears’ weight gain than they are with the looming disaster of a war with Iran.
How reliable is The Telegraph, Uk? Also,.. The London Times, UK ABC News and others who linked to the article, ‘the Pentagon plans a 3 day blitz on Iran’ It turned out to be based on – an interview with Alexis Debat. Turned out as All a fake. More at Laura Rozen’s blog
Now, The Telegraph notes bombing “2,000 targets in Iran” Do these targets include civilians? On what basis is this figure compiled?
Insane to think there won’t be a blow back. Not another Shock and Awe cakewalk, please.
Imho this Iran nuclear fear-mongering is meant to distract from the implosion of American fWMDs, meaning financial weapons of mass destruction, (a term coined by Warren Buffett when he warned in 2003 that these fWMDs were our greater fear; more so than terrorists.)
The implosion is underway.
Sarkozy’s foreign Minister saying war with Iran is inevitable doesn’t bother you?
This Alexis Debat story is proving again how truly rotten the msm has gotten. As long as someone says what they want to hear they don’t think to check any references…jeez..
When will these DemocRat fools wake up?
They are worried about the ELECTIONS!!!???
There will be no elections…or none that mean anything, anyway…if the Butch people time things right.
Bombs bursting in air at our twilight’s last gleaming…you remember the Iraq video gameshow, right?
Like that.
Only bigger and more dangerous.
Even LESS likely to succeed, as well.
“Stupid, vulgar sons of bitches who thought they could hire death as a company cop.” (William Burroughs)
Yup.
As our duly (s)elected officials settle back in their bunker-ensconced armchairs to watch the bloody show.
Sickening.
Dems AND Ratpubs.
Simply sickening.
AG
I’m with you Arthur. Our politicians are cravens, and our politics is debased.
concept…
What the fuck can we <d>do</d> about it?
AG
Maybe this:
LINK
Maybe.
From the above linked website.
Here’s the potential monkeywrench in the (political) machine here, though.
Yup.
But OUR government is NOT “technologically hapless”.
Intellectually and spiritually hapless?
You betcha.
But technologically?
Far from it.
They possess…and are using right this minute, quite probably right here on this website right now …the virtual equivalent of weapons of mass destruction.
Bet on it.
We are eventually going to have to lie down in front of their virtual tanks JUST as did the heroes of Tiananmen Square (only on another level) if we are going to have any positive influence whatsoever on this scene as it now stands.
Bet on THAT as well.
AG
European Tribune : Fran
Congress’ Liability in a Nuclear Strike on Iran – by Jorge Hirsch
Senator Chris Dodd has sent a letter to President Bush on Iran:
Disclosure: I proudly work for Chris Dodd’s presidential campaign.
One of the things that I find truly amazing is that there is no real analysis anywhere in the mainstream media which gives the American public any sense of just how monstrously catastrophic the economic ramifications would be if we preemptively attacked Iran on anywhere near the scale that is being discussed. Does anyone you know really understand what would happen to this country’s economy if the $120-150 a barrel oil scenario plays out? If everyone bemoans the results of the subprime mortgage disaster, the credit crunch and the anemic job growth. These get the play on our TV’s so people are passively familiar with these issues.
But with a significant number of Americans simply squeaking by, living paycheck to paycheck, has anyone tried to imagine what life would be like in this country after an attack on Iran? I mean, we are likely talking about an impact which could dwarf the post 9/11 economic fallout.
I just get the sense that no one is really talking about this except in the abstract. And let’s say we’re not looking at a temporary spike for just a few weeks or months, but a permanent price at that level, or higher. And let’s say, for arguments sake, that an Iran adventure makes our Iraq efforts look positively brilliant by comparison. That, to me, means a serious depression.
Are we ready, as a people, to throw our lot in with this scheme and undertake what could essentially destroy the economic future of our country? Is war the only possible solution? Or are we willing to believe those who led us into Iraq tell us that war with Iran our only choice? I’m afraid Americans are sleeping through this and will, once again, just let it happen.