Only 10% US see Iran as Immediate Threat |
Post Reply | Page <123> |
Author | |
Duende
Senior Member Joined: 27 July 2005 Status: Offline Points: 651 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The Next War Draws Nearer DEPARTMENT No Comment BY Scott Horton PUBLISHED August 23, 2007 http://harpers.org/archive/2007/08/hbc-90000995 Hardly a week passes in which I don�t get a message from someone within the great bureaucratic wasteland on the Potomac about the Bush Administration�s latest schemes relating to war against Iran. Now we�re going through another one of those periods in which the pace is quickening and the pitch is becoming more intense. I continue to put the prospects for a major military operation targeting Iran down as �likely,� and the time frame drawing nearer. When will Bush give the go ahead? I think late this year or early next would be the most congenial time frame from the perspective of the war party. Some of the developments that go into my call: **Labeling the Revolutionary Guards as �Terrorists.� Last week the Bush Administration floated the idea that it would schedule Iran�s Revolutionary Guards (an official part of the Iranian government) as a terrorist organization. This is related to the Administration�s propaganda drive to portray the Revolutionary Guard as deeply engaged in training terrorists in Iraq. (Iran is deeply engaged in outfitting and supporting factions loyal to it in Iraq, as is Saudi Arabia and other states.) Of course, the Revolutionary Guards answer directly to Supreme Leader Khamenei, so in taking this position, the Bush Administration is essentially saying that it has decided to ditch an initiative that focuses on skirting Ahmadinejad by going directly to Khamenei�that is, it is limiting its diplomatic options, yet again. No real surprise there, since it�s clear� notwithstanding statements from Condoleezza Rice about the exhaustion of diplomatic approaches�that the White House (read: Dick Cheney) places no store whatsoever in a diplomatic effort for Iran. **Preparation for a �Dirty War�? The branding of the Revolutionary Guard as terrorists raises troubling prospects with respect to targeting and military operations in Iran. Based on prior Bush Administration postures (adopted with respect to the Taliban, and units of Saddam Hussein�s military), it would mean that they are denied Geneva Convention protections in the coming war and could be treated to �highly coercive interrogation techniques� (i.e., torture) if captured. In sum, it looks like the Bush Administration is busily preparing for another �dirty war.� **Costing for Ground Operations in Iran. In the last two weeks the Department of Defense has begun pushing regular contractors very aggressively for �unit costs� to be used for logistical preparations for reconstruction and ground operations in a certain country of West Asia. In the last week, the requests have gotten increasingly harried. And what, exactly, is the country in question? Iran. **�There Will Be an Attack on Iran.� Former senior CIA analyst Bob Baer has a piece in the current Time Magazine called �Prelude to an Attack on Iran.� Baer also sees a quickening pace and an increasing likelihood of a sustained military assault on Iran, driven by the Neocons. Baer develops the scenario, showing how the Revolutionary Guards will be portrayed as terrorists, they will be linked to armor-penetrating projectiles used in Iraq, and this will be taken as a pretext to wage a war against Iran. He quotes an Administration official who says these explosive devices �are a casus belli for this Administration. There will be an attack on Iran.� **Bolton Wants Bombs in Six Months. John Bolton appeared on Fox News and was asked a question based on Bob Baer�s report. Bolton �absolutely hopes� it is true that bombs will start falling on Iran within six months. **The Predictable Role of Fox News. Fox News is intimately intertwined with the Administration�s propaganda machine, as a study of its coverage of the run-up to the Iraq War shows (and similarly, its decision to all but pull the plug on more recent coverage of the dismal situation in Iraq). Producer Robert Greenwald has done a terrific summary of how Fox News continues a propaganda build-up to support military action against Iran which closely parallels what it did for its masters in the run-up to the Iraq War. |
|
Sawtul Khilafah
Senior Member Joined: 20 July 2006 Location: Peru Status: Offline Points: 623 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
This is what I wrote on another Forum more than a year ago:
Here's the link: http://www.gawaher.com/index.php?showtopic=31791&st=0&am p;start=0 Everyone back then was worried that the USA and Israel were about to invade Iran while I made fun of the whole idea by saying "when are they going to attack? 2020?" In fact, outside internet Forums, I've been telling people for 4 years that Iran is not going to be invaded by the United States! If you look at the facts you will see that Iran and USA have everything in common, they are doing the exact same things with the exact same goals. The whole Nuclear issue was brought up to trick people into thinking that USA and Iran have something to "disagree" about. Then they started all the lies about Iran arming the resistance in Iraq and Even Afghanistan!!! (despite the fact that Iran actually HELPED the USA in Iraq and Afghanistan more than ANY other country in the world!). The whole "USA is going to attack Iran" thing keeps going up an down in the news. One day it's the headline, the next day they say "US found no proof of its accusations against Iran so there wont be an attack". The next day "oooh, the nuclear issue", then "oooh Iran arming insurgents", then "no proof" and so on... (since when has PROOF been valuable to the Bush administration? Remeber Iraq WMDs...? anyone?) I think the reason why this whole thing is being hightened now is to trick the resistance in Iraq...why? Because a lot of Sunni fighters in Iraq are fed up with Iran sending in their forces to help the United States, so much so that the leader of a major group in Iraq called "The Islamic State of Iraq" lead by Abu Omar al-Baghdad said that if Iran doesnt stop helping the US war on Iraq, he is actually going to make WAR ON IRAN!!! In order to trick him and other fighters in Iraq, the US is spread whole "we're gonna invade Iran" lie. This they hope would have two effects on Sunni Iraqis and other mujahideen: 1: They would be tricked into thinking that USA and Iran are really enemies and their alliance in Iraq is only "temporary and insignifcant". 2: They would think that by attacking Iran they are doing what America wants. In other words, they are trying to discourage them from attacking Iran by spreading the rumour that the US is planning to do the same thing.... Also by spreading the whole "Al-Qaeda are CIA agents" conspiracy theory, they hope that even if Al-Qaeda or their allies attack Iran, it could be portrayed as USA's attack on Iran (remember what Khamenehi said? He said that the Iraqi resistance are agents of America....! : http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=9650& ;PN=1&TPN=1 ) Wassalamu 'alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh
|
|
Sign*Reader
Senior Member Joined: 02 November 2005 Status: Offline Points: 3352 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
SK
If Your hypothesis is on the money why US & Iran don't have diplomatic relations? |
|
Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction.
|
|
Duende
Senior Member Joined: 27 July 2005 Status: Offline Points: 651 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hush, SignReader, don't ask sensible questions.
Like, for example, why Israel would play along with such a st**id strategy: "The Israeli advice against using military force against Iraq was apparently triggered by reports reaching Israeli officials in December 2001 that the Bush administration was beginning serious planning for an attack on Iraq. Journalist Bob Woodward revealed in "Plan of Attack" that on Dec. 1, 2001, Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld had ordered the Central Command chief Gen. Tommy Franks to come up with the first formal briefing on a new war plan for Iraq on Dec. 4. That started a period of intense discussions of war planning between Rumsfeld and Franks. Soon after Israeli officials got wind of that planning, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon asked for a meeting with Bush primarily to discuss U.S. intentions to invade Iraq. In the weeks preceding Sharon's meeting with Bush on Feb. 7, 2002, a procession of Israeli officials conveyed the message to the Bush administration that Iran represented a greater threat, according to a Washington Post report on the eve of the meeting. Israeli Defence Minister Fouad Ben-Eliezer, who was visiting Washington with Sharon, revealed the essence of the strategic differences between Tel Aviv and Washington over military force. He was quoted by the Post as saying, "Today, everybody is busy with Iraq. Iraq is a problem...But you should understand, if you ask me, today Iran is more dangerous than Iraq." www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39051 |
|
Sawtul Khilafah
Senior Member Joined: 20 July 2006 Location: Peru Status: Offline Points: 623 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
That's the whole point, they dont want people to know that they are allies so they try not to do much in the open. What I find amazing is that the meeting between Iran and USA was seen as such a big deal in Iran, especially among the religious Iranians. Then Khamenehi the Leader of Iran came out and said "we are only going to talk to them about Iraq, they are still our enemey, death to America...." (not an exact quote but that was pretty much it). Now this was while Iran had actually sent armed men to Afghanistan to fight alongside the USA, but the Iranian Media and Leader and politicians simply didnt talk about it and so most Iranians dont even know it today. Only President Khatami finally mentioned it years after, and that was after it had been exposed as it was reported by numerous eyewitnesses and journalists in Afghanistan who had seen the Iranian forces - Amazingly, the group that Iran sent to help the US in Afghanistan was the QUDS FORCE.... this was the same group that Bush later accused of "arming the insurgency in Iraq"!! This is while the Quds force was always helping the United States in Afghanistan, and the Iraqis who were being armed by them were groups like the Badr Brigade who are not a resistance group, but on the contrary their job is to help the US occupation and actually Fight the resistance!! So while helping eachother all the way, they are trying to fool people into thinking that they are enemies by simply using words against eachother. For years Khamenehi told his followers that there would never even be a meeting with the US, then there was and he then tried to convince people that it's ok and wont turn into an alliance... this is while Iran had been allied with the US in Afghanistan Years before these "meetings", yet the meetings are seen as such a big deal because most people dont know about the actual alliance and the fact that the US was arming Iran even during the 1980s. Back then, a relative of Ayatollah Montaziri (a famous Shiah cleric) revealed that Iran was being given American weapons through Israeli ships!!! The Iranian Government arrested and then Executed him!!! It was unbelievable, but after the claim was made it was investigated in the United States and was actually proven to be true. Then the Reagan administration claimed that they were giving Iran weapons so that Iran would tell "Hezbollah" to free its hostages (hahahah, yeah right!). Long story short, Iran has always been working for/with the West, including the USA, but they have both been trying their best to hide it. |
|
Duende
Senior Member Joined: 27 July 2005 Status: Offline Points: 651 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Sawtul, I think you are permanently delusional: believing firmly in events
very few others can agree with. The extreme twists of logic required to get you to your current delusional beliefs are exhausting to work through, which is another sign that your mind does not quite work normally. Delusions require vast explanations involving ever more extreme scenarios. Like the accounts of UFO sightings and body abductions, in the end, everyone starts to wonder whether there�s a grain of truth in it . But it doesn�t mean you are any less delusional. It is not just that you personally are deceitful, divisive or just plain annoying. It is simply extremely difficult to accept your twisted rhetoric and explanations of a unified Iran/USA strategy given the utter childishness of it, in terms of global political policy. Does anyone think, honestly now, that behind all the rhetoric coming from Bush and Ahmadineyad, they secretly sit chuckling to themselves about how well they�ve pulled the wool over everybody�s eyes? Can you understand how is it possible that all commentary regarding Iranian-US relations be utterly BACKWARDS, not just throughout the 7 year rule of the Neocons in Washington, but all the way back to the days of the British Imperial Tobacco company? Can anybody really seriously consider that every single observer so far has got it entirely WRONG about a possible US attack on Iran, and that only Sawtul has the foresight and intelligence to turn things on their head and say: no, it�s not really like that, they�re just kidding? Can Sawtul really be the only person in the world to know the REAL TRUTH of the relations between Israel, Iran and the United States? Doesn�t it strike you as plain childish to deny that people such as Uri Avenry, Robert Fisk, Seymour Hersh, (to name just a few of the globally recognised Mid-East authorities,) are really st**id and have missed this extraordinary cover-up where Teheran and Washington are secretly in bed together �.? The scale of the delusion you are trying to persuade us of, defies imagination: military documents, CIA reports, independent observers, UN staff, seasoned foreign and domestic investigative journalists, ALL colluding and twitching like puppets according to your insane reading of events involving Israel, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq and the USA. That�s quite a broad brush stroke you�re painting. You lack the intellect and maturity to observe events involving each of these countries, weighing past history and current events, with anything like the authority necessary to come up with a global plan, least of all such a childish one. Of course, your acclaimed foresight means events inevitably resolve the way YOU predict, simply because of your delusional state, and because your scenario is so utterly childish. Most forum members here are mature enough to know about the misleading nature of MSM. We don�t swallow the news coming out of Afghanistan, Iraq or Gaza as easily as you seem to think. It is not a question of opening our eyes and ears to a distinctly contradictory account of anything. Sawtul, you speak down to us, patiently explaining your twisted logic and emphasising points only YOU find startling, this is the attitude of someone deeply into delusion. The bottom line in all your posts is: Shia is bad, Sunni is good, and Iranians are deceitful, untrustworthy manipulators and hypocrites. That doesn�t mean you are an authority on Iran-US relations. It just means you are obsessed with your own ghosts and have created a wild and colourfull delusion for yourself, which of course, needs constant approval from outside, otherwise you would collapse under the weight of your own unresolved, conflictive issues. Salaam |
|
Sign*Reader
Senior Member Joined: 02 November 2005 Status: Offline Points: 3352 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
If I look at the events and happenings in and around Afghanistan and the role Iranians played it makes sense now! Come to think of the eve of Twin Towers' blow down, on Sep. 10 why did the arab suicide bombers blowup Northern Alliance's honcho Ahmed Shah Masood? He was the main man working with Indians, CIA, Russians, Tajiks and Iranians et al against the Talibs, Pakis, Chechens and other Arabs so if we were to step back and ponder the Iranian collusion; it is like enemy of my enemy is a friend (and I benefit from this in disguise)! I didn't like to believe this but you know SK, I see these alliances of the convenience and the resultant advantages Iran got by easily with the destruction of two of her main enemies (Taliban & Saddam), in one fell swoop of the Empire coming down. The politics makes strange bed fellows! This monkey business has been going on in Iraq in some of the strangest form, there is a collusion of all sorts with the Shiah groups by the US like I read in today's LA Times front page about Ammar Hakim (HL: He is close to the US and Iran) Ammar Hakim may be the White House's Best hope for an ally, but the young cleric has made it clear he's his own man........ right What a way to see the proof of the dissimulation? I think it is disgusting!!! Edited by Sign*Reader |
|
Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction.
|
|
Duende
Senior Member Joined: 27 July 2005 Status: Offline Points: 651 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The duplicity of US alliances (and no doubt Iranian, every country does
what it feels to be politically expedient in any given moment, even if that means scandals and death) is well known: the building up of Noriega only to set him up as a drug/arms dealer, the financing and support for the fledgling Mujahedeen including Osama Bin Laden, the hand shakes and donations to Saddaam Hussein, the current support for Musharraf, Karzai and Maliki. They will all end in tears. But the one big spanner in the works as far as SKs delusional Iran-US collusion goes, is Israel. Why has he not responded to my question? Why would Israel go along with such a secret alliance? (Forget about Saudi ...) |
|
Post Reply | Page <123> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |