| Topic: |
Science > Prophecies-Of-Nostradamus |
| User: |
"Docrodile" |
| Date: |
15 Jan 2007 02:15:47 AM |
| Object: |
KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
U.S military strike on Iran seen by April, 2007: Kuwait media
U.S. might launch a military strike on Iran before April 2007,
Kuwait-based daily Arab Times released on Sunday said in a report.
The report, written by Arab Times' Editor-in-chief Ahmed al- Jarallah
citing a reliable source, said that the attack would be launched from the
sea, while Patriot missiles would guard all Arab countries in the Gulf.
Recent statements emanating from the United States indicated the Bush
administration's new strategy for Iraq doesn't include any proposal to
make a compromise or negotiate with Syria or Iran, added the report.
The source told al-Jarallah that U.S. President George W. Bush recently
had held a meeting with Vice President ***** Cheney, Defense Secretary
Robert Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other assistants in
the White House, where they discussed the plan to attack Iran in minute
detail.
Vice President ***** Cheney highlighted the threat posed by Iran to not
only Saudi Arabia but also the whole Gulf region, according to the source.
"Tehran is not playing politics. Iranian leaders are using their country's
religious influence to support the aggressive regime's ambition to
expand," ***** Cheney was quoted by the source as saying.
Indicating participants of the meeting agreed to impose restrictions on
the ambitions of Iranian regime before April 2007 without exposing other
countries in the region to any danger, the source said "they have chosen
April as British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said it will be the last
month in office for him. The United States has to take action against Iran
and Syria before April 2007."
Claiming the attack will be launched from the sea and not from any country
in the region, he said "the U.S. and its allies will target the oil
installations and nuclear facilities of Iran ensuring there is no
environmental catastrophe or after effects."
The source added that the U.S. has started sending its warships to the
Gulf and the build-up would continue until Washington has the required
number by the end of this month.
"U.S. forces in Iraq and other countries in the region will be protected
against any Iranian missile attack by an advanced Patriot missile system,"
the source noted.
The Bush administration believes that attacking Iran will create a new
power balance in the region, calming down the situation in Iraq and paving
the way for their democratic project, which have to be suspended due to
the interference of Tehran and Damascus in Iraq, according to the source.
Source: Xinhua
http://english.people.com.cn/200701/15/eng20070115_341128.html
.
|
|
| User: "=?utf-8?B?4pi6IC7CtzoqwqjCqCo6wrcuwrc6KsKowqgqOsK3LiAg4pmlIFdvcmxkIFdhciBJSUkgMjAwNywgVGhlIExhc3QgMjAwMCBEYXlzLi4uSE9PUk9PICEgIC7CtzoqwqjCqCo6wrcuIOKZpeKYusKpwq7ihKI=?=" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL 2007; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
19 Jan 2007 12:28:04 AM |
|
|
Another article for U, Gary
hooroo
uncle wally
----0----
http://www.mosnews.com/news/2007/01/15/admiral.shtml
Russian Admiral Says U.S. Navy Prepares Missile Strike on Iran
Created: 15.01.2007 11:45 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 15:43 MSK
MosNews
U=2ES. Navy nuclear submarines maintaining vigil off the coast of Iran
indicate that the Pentagon=E2=80=99s military plans include not only control
over navigation in the Persian Gulf but also strikes against Iranian
targets, a former commander of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, Admiral
Eduard Baltin has told the Interfax news agency.
=E2=80=9CThe presence of U.S. nuclear submarines in the Persian Gulf region
means that the Pentagon has not abandoned plans for surprise strikes
against nuclear targets in Iran. With this aim a group of multi-purpose
submarines ready to accomplish the task is located in the area,=E2=80=9D
Admiral Baltin said.
He made the comments after reports that a U.S. submarine collided with
a Japanese tanker in the Strait of Hormuz.
=E2=80=9CAmerican patience is not unlimited,=E2=80=9D he said. =E2=80=9CThe=
submarine
commanders go up to the periscope depth and forget about navigation
rules and safety measures,=E2=80=9D the admiral said.
Currently there is a group of up to four submarines in the Persian Gulf
area, he said. So far they only control navigation in the Persian Gulf,
the Gulf of Oman, and in the Arabian Sea, he said. They might receive
different orders in future: to block off the Gulf of Oman, that is the
Iranian coast, and, if need be, launch missile strikes against
ground targets in Iran, he said.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Docrodile wrote:
U.S military strike on Iran seen by April, 2007: Kuwait media
U.S. might launch a military strike on Iran before April 2007,
Kuwait-based daily Arab Times released on Sunday said in a report.
The report, written by Arab Times' Editor-in-chief Ahmed al- Jarallah
citing a reliable source, said that the attack would be launched from the
sea, while Patriot missiles would guard all Arab countries in the Gulf.
Recent statements emanating from the United States indicated the Bush
administration's new strategy for Iraq doesn't include any proposal to
make a compromise or negotiate with Syria or Iran, added the report.
The source told al-Jarallah that U.S. President George W. Bush recently
had held a meeting with Vice President ***** Cheney, Defense Secretary
Robert Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other assistants in
the White House, where they discussed the plan to attack Iran in minute
detail.
Vice President ***** Cheney highlighted the threat posed by Iran to not
only Saudi Arabia but also the whole Gulf region, according to the source.
"Tehran is not playing politics. Iranian leaders are using their country's
religious influence to support the aggressive regime's ambition to
expand," ***** Cheney was quoted by the source as saying.
Indicating participants of the meeting agreed to impose restrictions on
the ambitions of Iranian regime before April 2007 without exposing other
countries in the region to any danger, the source said "they have chosen
April as British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said it will be the last
month in office for him. The United States has to take action against Iran
and Syria before April 2007."
Claiming the attack will be launched from the sea and not from any country
in the region, he said "the U.S. and its allies will target the oil
installations and nuclear facilities of Iran ensuring there is no
environmental catastrophe or after effects."
The source added that the U.S. has started sending its warships to the
Gulf and the build-up would continue until Washington has the required
number by the end of this month.
"U.S. forces in Iraq and other countries in the region will be protected
against any Iranian missile attack by an advanced Patriot missile system,"
the source noted.
The Bush administration believes that attacking Iran will create a new
power balance in the region, calming down the situation in Iraq and paving
the way for their democratic project, which have to be suspended due to
the interference of Tehran and Damascus in Iraq, according to the source.
Source: Xinhua
http://english.people.com.cn/200701/15/eng20070115_341128.html
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "=?utf-8?B?4pi6IC7CtzoqwqjCqCo6wrcuwrc6KsKowqgqOsK3LiDimaUgV29ybGQgV2FyIElJSSAyMDA3LCBUaGUgTGFzdCAyMDAwIERheXMuLi5IT09ST08gISAuwrc6KsKowqgqOsK3LiDimaXimLrCqcKu4oSi?=" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
07 Feb 2007 02:21:39 AM |
|
|
Another article for your collection, Gary !!!
HOOROO =E2=98=BA .=C2=B7:*=C2=A8=C2=A8*:=C2=B7.=C2=B7:*=C2=A8=C2=A8*:=C2=B7=
.. =E2=99=A5
UNCLE WALLY =E2=98=BA .=C2=B7:*=C2=A8=C2=A8*:=C2=B7.=C2=B7:*=C2=A8=C2=A8*:=
=C2=B7. =E2=99=A5
----0----
http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/897/81/
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_walter_c_070204_israel_s_bomb_2c_ir=
an_.htm
Israel's Bomb, Iran's Pursuit of the Bomb and U.S. War Preparations
(Part One)
PART ONE
Four years ago today, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell played a
major role in persuading a gullible, stupefied and craven American
news media and public - but not a cynical world - to support the Bush
administration's illegal, immoral invasion of Iraq. He did so by
presenting a panoply of lies, false statements and exaggerations about
Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and ties to al Qaeda terrorists.
Four years later, as both United States and Israel prepare their
populations for an illegal, immoral preventive war against Iran --
allegedly to disrupt, if not destroy, the secret nuclear weapons
program that both insist (without evidence) is well under way there --
Americans might do well to avoid being duped again. Thus, they might
contemplate not only the allegations against Iran, but also the sins
of the United States and Israel when it comes to developing, using and
brandishing their own nuclear weapons.
The sins of the United States are quite well known. Acting on the
advice of Albert Einstein, who feared that Nazi Germany might obtain
nuclear weapons, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt authorized a
crash program, the Manhattan Project, to develop the bombs that would
be dropped at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
In Five Days in August, Michael D. Gordin asserts: "Military men in
particular considered the decision to drop the bomb as a given from
the moment development shaded into a deliverable weapon" [p. 11]
Moreover, "By the time the Americans began to consider the potential
utility of the atomic bomb, they had already for years experienced
increasing brutality, bloodshed, mayhem, and dehumanization, and
experienced them routinely." [pp. 7-8] Thus, the United States dropped
the bombs on Japan as if they were just tactical weapons, but as part
of a "'shock strategy' to compel the Japanese government to accept
surrender." [p. 13].
Truman, however, soon believed otherwise. As Tsuyoshi Hasegawa writes
in his meticulously researched book, Racing the Enemy: Stalin, Truman,
and the Surrender of Japan, "Truman had read the Magic Diplomatic
Summary reporting that the atomic bomb on Hiroshima had killed 100,000
people." "He didn't like the idea of killing... 'all these kids,'"
Admiral William Leahy wrote in his diary. [p 202]
Thus, on August 10, 1945 - a day after Fat Man was dropped on Nagasaki
and the very day that the Japanese government sent a letter to the
Swiss legation to the United States government protesting the use of
atomic bombs as a crime against humanity [ibid. p. 299] - "Truman
announced that he had given an order to stop further atomic bombing
without his authorization." [Ibid, p. 202]
In addition to Truman, the bomb quickly awed war-weary Americans,
thanks, in part, to the propaganda about the technological marvel and
ultimate weapon that "journalist" William Leonard Laurence aimed at
both Japanese and American audiences. Not only did Americans
naturally, but mistakenly, assume that the bomb was responsible for
Japan's abrupt surrender, they also experienced "visions and fears of
total annihilation [which] emerged almost immediately upon Japanese
surrender." [Gordin, p. 131]
Actually, it was the Soviet Union's entry into the war against Japan,
not the two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki alone, that
prompted Japan's surrender. According to Professor Hasegawa: "Without
the Soviet entry into the war, the Japanese would have continued to
fight until numerous atomic bombs, a successful allied invasion of the
home islands, or continued aerial bombardments, combined with a naval
blockade, rendered them incapable of doing so." [Hasegawa, p.298]
According to Hasegawa, "Americans still cling to the myth that the
atomic bombs...provided the knockout punch to the Japanese
government...The myth serves to justify Truman's decision and ease the
collective American conscience." [Ibid, pp. 298-99] "Until his death,
Truman continually came back to this question and repeatedly justified
his decision, inventing a fiction that he himself later came to
believe." [Ibid, p. 299]. Hasegawa might have added that America's
collective conscious also was eased by a widespread faith that such an
indisputable demonstration of America's technological prowess once
again indicated that God had assigned the U.S. an "exceptional" role
in His plans for mankind.
Thus, Americans deluded themselves twice. First, about their own
guilt. Second, about the efficacy of the bomb. Which explains why, "a
year after the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, U.S. strategy
proposed dropping fifty atomic bombs on twenty separate Soviet
cities." [Gordin, p. 130] Some (sick) Americans even advocated a
preemptive nuclear strike on the Soviet Union, lest it break America's
nuclear monopoly.
Additionally, as Joseph Gerson has observed: "Unlike any other nation,
on more than thirty occasions since the A-bombing of Nagasaki every
U=2ES. president has prepared or threatened to initiate first strike
nuclear attacks during crises...Since 1950, the U.S. has threatened
North Korea with nuclear attack at least eight times. Nearly a dozen
such threats have been made during Middle East wars and crises. Since
the end of the Cold War, Iraq, Iran, North Korea and Libya have been
threatened with U.S. nuclear attacks. And, the 2002...Bush-Cheney
Nuclear Posture Review named seven nations as primary U.S. nuclear
targets: Iraq, Iran, North Korea, China, Russia, Libya and
Syria." [Gerson, "Preventing Nuclear War in Korea," Znet Oct. 18,
2006]
Making matters worse, on March 15, 2005, the Department of Defense
released a policy paper, "'Doctrine for Joint Nuclear
Operations,'...which made permissible the employment of nuclear
weapons by the United States preemptively, in non-nuclear
environments, either to defeat overwhelming conventional opposition,
or simply to assure U.S. victory." [Ritter, Target Iran, p. 179]
How such a U.S. willingness to use the bomb would discourage other
countries from pursuing their own nuclear deterrent is difficult to
imagine -- especially after the Bush administration's whimsical
invasion of "brittle," nuke-less Iraq.
Moreover, the sole country to ever to use the bomb also continues to
brandish it and upgrade it in bad faith and in violation of Article VI
of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT). Article VI stipulates:
"Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations
in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the
nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on
a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and
effective international control."
Yet, now, the hypocritical and reckless Bush administration is
accusing Iran of deceit and lies regarding its nuclear program and has
gone so far as to demand that Iran - a signatory to the NPT -- even
forego rights legally available to it under the NPT. The Bush
administration is being prodded by Israel, another hypocritical and
rogue nuclear power that refuses to be bound by the NPT
According to Scott Ritter, writing in his recent book, Target Iran,
"the conflict currently underway between the United States and Iran
is, first and foremost, a conflict born in Israel. It is based upon an
Israeli contention that Iran poses a threat to Israel, and defined by
Israeli assertions that Iran possesses a nuclear weapons program. None
of this has been shown to be true, and indeed much of the allegations
made by Israel against Iran have been clearly demonstrated as being
false." [p. 208]
Yet, given Israel's own dishonorable record of deceit and lies
attending the building of its own bomb, everyone should readily
understand why Israel's rulers today remain suspicious about Iran's
nuclear program. After all, how could any Israeli possibly believe
that Iran's leaders today are less dishonorable than their own leaders
were?
It's that very pattern of deceit and lies behind Israel's bomb, which
will be examined in Part Two of this article.
Walter C. Uhler.com
Walter C. Uhler is an independent scholar and freelance writer whose
work has been published in numerous publications, including The
Nation, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the Journal of Military
History, the Moscow Times and the San Francisco Chronicle. He also is
President of the Russian-American International Studies Association
(RAISA).
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Monday, 05 February 2007
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
16 Jan 2007 10:56:02 PM |
|
|
Docrodile wrote:
U.S military strike on Iran seen by April, 2007: Kuwait
media
*Yawn*
Going back some time ago, Iran threatened to block the
Strait of Hormuz if we imposed sanctions.
Approximately 90% of all Persian Gulf oil passes through
the Strait.
If you're old enough, or clever enough, you might recall
how the entire western world was thrown into a deep
recession after the Arab oil embargo in 1973:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis
Anyhow, closing the Strait -- and 90% of Persian Gulf
oil -- would be worse today than the embargo was in
1973.
How bad was it in the 1970s?
Before it was all over & the economies of the west
recovered, the stock market lost about 45% of it's
value. The crisis was so big that there was gas
rationing, and purchases limited to 10 gallons at a
time. The 55 mile-per-hour speed limit was also
imposed at this time, in direct response to the oil
crisis. Cars of the day got peak fuel economy around
40 MPH. By lowering the speed limit nationally, the
nation saved millions of barrels of fuel.
We depend MORE on imported oil today than we did
in the 1970s.
Anyhow, to bring you up to date: Sanctions have been
(past tense) imposed on Iran.
It would be insane -- even treason -- for Bush to have
not sent naval assests to the Persian Gulf (in order to
protect the Straits) given Iran's stated threats.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dr. Bipolar" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
17 Jan 2007 02:12:09 AM |
|
|
JTEM wrote:
Docrodile wrote:
U.S military strike on Iran seen by April, 2007: Kuwait
media
*Yawn*
Going back some time ago, Iran threatened to block the
Strait of Hormuz if we imposed sanctions.
Approximately 90% of all Persian Gulf oil passes through
the Strait.
If you're old enough, or clever enough, you might recall
how the entire western world was thrown into a deep
recession after the Arab oil embargo in 1973:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis
Anyhow, closing the Strait -- and 90% of Persian Gulf
oil -- would be worse today than the embargo was in
1973.
How bad was it in the 1970s?
Before it was all over & the economies of the west
recovered, the stock market lost about 45% of it's
value. The crisis was so big that there was gas
rationing, and purchases limited to 10 gallons at a
time. The 55 mile-per-hour speed limit was also
imposed at this time, in direct response to the oil
crisis. Cars of the day got peak fuel economy around
40 MPH. By lowering the speed limit nationally, the
nation saved millions of barrels of fuel.
We depend MORE on imported oil today than we did
in the 1970s.
Anyhow, to bring you up to date: Sanctions have been
(past tense) imposed on Iran.
It would be insane -- even treason -- for Bush to have
not sent naval assests to the Persian Gulf (in order to
protect the Straits) given Iran's stated threats.
*YAWN*
Wake me when it's my turn at the gas pump...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Charly the Bastard" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL; US NAVALBUILD-UP CONTINUES |
17 Jan 2007 05:51:44 AM |
|
|
JTEM wrote:
Docrodile wrote:
U.S military strike on Iran seen by April, 2007: Kuwait
media
*Yawn*
Going back some time ago, Iran threatened to block the
Strait of Hormuz if we imposed sanctions.
Approximately 90% of all Persian Gulf oil passes through
the Strait.
If you're old enough, or clever enough, you might recall
how the entire western world was thrown into a deep
recession after the Arab oil embargo in 1973:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis
Anyhow, closing the Strait -- and 90% of Persian Gulf
oil -- would be worse today than the embargo was in
1973.
How bad was it in the 1970s?
Before it was all over & the economies of the west
recovered, the stock market lost about 45% of it's
value. The crisis was so big that there was gas
rationing, and purchases limited to 10 gallons at a
time. The 55 mile-per-hour speed limit was also
imposed at this time, in direct response to the oil
crisis. Cars of the day got peak fuel economy around
40 MPH. By lowering the speed limit nationally, the
nation saved millions of barrels of fuel.
We depend MORE on imported oil today than we did
in the 1970s.
Anyhow, to bring you up to date: Sanctions have been
(past tense) imposed on Iran.
It would be insane -- even treason -- for Bush to have
not sent naval assests to the Persian Gulf (in order to
protect the Straits) given Iran's stated threats.
I remember it well. The price of gas doubled... to fifty cents a gallon.
There were lines for fuel, and sometimes violence broke out in the line
over people taking 'cuts'. There was 'rationing', because the oil
companies shut down refineries to exaserbate the already bad situation
and increase their profit margin. (Sounds like post-Katrina, eh?) You
still don't get it. The oil companies are the 'Arabs'. Without the
development of the ME oilfields by US and European oil companies, the
'Arabs' would still be living in tents in the desert.
Let me tell you about The Plan... here in the US, when an oil company
drills a hole, they know where the oil is before the bit turns once.
They drill down to within a hundred feet of the deposit, then call the
well a 'duster' and write the cost off on their taxes for three years.
At the end of the three years, when the government has essentially paid
for the cost of the hole, they go in with a clean-out rig and knock the
last hundred feet to the deposit and bring the well in, producing profit
from day one. This technique applies to foreign operations as well.
I've worked in the industry, I KNOW this is the way it is. The well we
drill today will be online in three years, and not one second before.
This isn't about nation-building or spreading 'democracy', it's about
profits and control of resources. Ideology is nice, but we're talking
about MONEY here, and money is a greater lever than any ideology. The
Almighty Dollar, the only God they know. WE are Sooooo Boned.
Charly
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "=?utf-8?B?4pi6IC7CtzoqwqjCqCo6wrcuwrc6KsKowqgqOsK3LiDimaUgV29ybGQgV2FyIElJSSAyMDA3LCBUaGUgTGFzdCAyMDAwIERheXMuLi5IT09ST08gISAuwrc6KsKowqgqOsK3LiDimaXimLrCqcKu4oSi?=" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL 2007; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
20 Jan 2007 09:51:45 PM |
|
|
Docrodile wrote:
U.S military strike on Iran seen by April, 2007: Kuwait media
U.S. might launch a military strike on Iran before April 2007,
Kuwait-based daily Arab Times released on Sunday said in a report.
The report, written by Arab Times' Editor-in-chief Ahmed al- Jarallah
citing a reliable source, said that the attack would be launched from the
sea, while Patriot missiles would guard all Arab countries in the Gulf.
Recent statements emanating from the United States indicated the Bush
administration's new strategy for Iraq doesn't include any proposal to
make a compromise or negotiate with Syria or Iran, added the report.
The source told al-Jarallah that U.S. President George W. Bush recently
had held a meeting with Vice President ***** Cheney, Defense Secretary
Robert Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other assistants in
the White House, where they discussed the plan to attack Iran in minute
detail.
Vice President ***** Cheney highlighted the threat posed by Iran to not
only Saudi Arabia but also the whole Gulf region, according to the source.
"Tehran is not playing politics. Iranian leaders are using their country's
religious influence to support the aggressive regime's ambition to
expand," ***** Cheney was quoted by the source as saying.
Indicating participants of the meeting agreed to impose restrictions on
the ambitions of Iranian regime before April 2007 without exposing other
countries in the region to any danger, the source said "they have chosen
April as British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said it will be the last
month in office for him. The United States has to take action against Iran
and Syria before April 2007."
Claiming the attack will be launched from the sea and not from any country
in the region, he said "the U.S. and its allies will target the oil
installations and nuclear facilities of Iran ensuring there is no
environmental catastrophe or after effects."
The source added that the U.S. has started sending its warships to the
Gulf and the build-up would continue until Washington has the required
number by the end of this month.
"U.S. forces in Iraq and other countries in the region will be protected
against any Iranian missile attack by an advanced Patriot missile system,"
the source noted.
The Bush administration believes that attacking Iran will create a new
power balance in the region, calming down the situation in Iraq and paving
the way for their democratic project, which have to be suspended due to
the interference of Tehran and Damascus in Iraq, according to the source.
Source: Xinhua
http://english.people.com.cn/200701/15/eng20070115_341128.html
Gooday Gazza !!!
Another very important article for your news archives
HOOROO
UNCLE WALLY
=3D=3D=3D=3D0=3D=3D=3D=3D
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=3DviewArticle&code=3DBOY2007=
0120&articleId=3D4528
Immediate Impeachments: Preventing "The Guns of August" in Eurasia
by Prof. Francis Boyle
Global Research, January 20, 2007
Email this article to a friend
Print this article
The Bush Jr. /Cheney refusal to obtain additional authorization from
Congress for this substantial enlargement of U.S. armed forces in Iraq
constitutes an impeachable offense under the terms of Article II,
Section 4 of the United States Constitution for violating the
Constitution=E2=80=99s War Powers Clause and Congress=E2=80=99s own War Pow=
ers
Resolution
If President Bush Jr. and Vice President Cheney are not stopped
immediately by means of impeachment, they could readily set off World
War III in the volatile Middle East, Persian Gulf and Central Asia,
where two-thirds of the world=E2=80=99s hydrocarbon resources are up for
grabs among the United States, Russia, China, and India. The Guns of
August indeed.
O n the evening of 10 January 2007 in a nationally televised address to
the American people from the White House, President Bush Jr. announced
that he was going to =E2=80=9Csurge=E2=80=9D an additional 21,500 U.S. troo=
ps into
Iraq. Both President Bush Jr. and Vice President Cheney also made it
perfectly clear that they would initiate this =E2=80=9Csurge=E2=80=9D again=
st the
manifest will of the American people expressed in the U.S. national
elections of November 2006 and without obtaining authorization by the
U=2ES. Congress.
Both President Bush Jr. and Vice President Cheney invoked the
President=E2=80=99s alleged powers as Commander in Chief of U.S. armed forc=
es
under Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution as
authority for their unilaterally determined =E2=80=9Csurge=E2=80=9D. But th=
at
provision was put into the Constitution for the purpose of guaranteeing
the supremacy of civilian control over the U.S. military establishment
.. The Constitution made it clear in Article I, Section 8, Clause 11
that only both Houses of the United States Congress acting together had
the power =E2=80=9CTo declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and
make rules concerning Captures on Land and Water.=E2=80=9D This is popularly
known as the War Powers Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Pursuant to its constitutional power under this War Powers Clause, and
acting in order to prevent another Vietnam War, Congress enacted into
law the 1973 War Powers Resolution [For full text see Annex below] over
the veto by President Richard Nixon, which means that it was adopted by
at least a two-thirds favorable vote in both the House and the Senate .
In specific respect to the 10 January 2007 =E2=80=9Csurge=E2=80=9D of 21,5=
00 more
U=2ES. troops to Iraq, the War Powers Resolution explicitly requires that
President Bush Jr. obtain additional authorization from Congress before
going forward with the =E2=80=9Csurge,=E2=80=9D which he did nonetheless
unilaterally. Section 4(a) (3) makes it quite clear that the
requirements of the War Powers Resolution are triggered:
=E2=80=9CIn the absence of a declaration of war [which we do not have for
Iraq], in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced
=E2=80=A6 (3) in numbers which substantially enlarge United States Armed
Forces equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation . . .=E2=80=
=9D
[see below]
At the time we had about 132,000 troops in Iraq. Sending in an
additional 21,500 troops would =E2=80=9Csubstantially enlarge=E2=80=9D thos=
e armed
forces. Therefore, the Bush Jr. Administration required further
authorization from Congress for this euphemistic =E2=80=9Csurge,=E2=80=9D w=
hich is
really a substantial escalation. The Bush Jr. /Cheney refusal to obtain
additional authorization from Congress for this substantial enlargement
of U.S. armed forces in Iraq constitutes an impeachable offense under
the terms of Article II, Section 4 of the United States Constitution
for violating the Constitution=E2=80=99s War Powers Clause and Congress=E2=
=80=99s
own War Powers Resolution. (Editor: emphasis added)
The same constitutional arguments apply to the Bush Jr.
Administration=E2=80=99s proposed substantial enlargement of U.S. armed
forces in Afghanistan by one combat brigade of about 3,500 U.S. troops
on top of the 21,000 U.S. soldiers already there .
Of course the War Powers Resolution also requires express authorization
from the U.S. Congress before the Bush Jr administration can launch a
military attack upon Iran, which it is currently threatening and
preparing to do.
If President Bush Jr. and Vice President Cheney are not stopped
immediately by means of impeachment, they could readily set off World
War III in the volatile Middle East, Persian Gulf and Central Asia,
where two-thirds of the world=E2=80=99s hydrocarbon resources are up for
grabs among the United States, Russia, China, and India. The Guns of
August indeed.
Francis A. Boyle is Professor of Law at the University of Illinois. He
is author of Foundations of World Order, Duke University Press, The
Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence, and Palestine, Palestinians and
International Law, by Clarity Press. He can be reached at:
FBOYLE@LAW.UIUC.EDU He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
ANNEX
WAR POWERS RESOLUTION
Public Law 93-148
93rd Congress, H. J. Res. 542
November 7, 1973
Joint Resolution
Concerning the War Powers of Congress and the President.
Resolved by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled,
SHORT TITLE
SECTION 1. This joint resolution may be cited as the "War Powers
Resolution".
PURPOSE AND POLICY
SEC. 2. (a) It is the purpose of this joint resolution to fulfill the
intent of the framers of the Constitution of the United States and
insure that the collective judgement of both the Congress and the
President will apply to the introduction of United States Armed Forces
into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in
hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and to the
continued use of such forces in hostilities or in such situations.
(b) Under article I, section 8, of the Constitution, it is specifically
provided that the Congress shall have the power to make all laws
necessary and proper for carrying into execution, not only its own
powers but also all other powers vested by the Constitution in the
Government of the United States, or in any department or officer
thereof.
(c) The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to
introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into
situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly
indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a
declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a
national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its
territories or possessions, or its armed forces.
CONSULTATION
SEC. 3. The President in every possible instance shall consult with
Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities
or into situation where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly
indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall
consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces
are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such
situations.
REPORTING
SEC. 4. (a) In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in
which United States Armed Forces are introduced--
(1) into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in
hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances;
(2) into the territory, airspace or waters of a foreign nation, while
equipped for combat, except for deployments which relate solely to
supply, replacement, repair, or training of such forces; or
(3) in numbers which substantially enlarge United States Armed Forces
equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation; the president
shall submit within 48 hours to the Speaker of the House of
Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate a
report, in writing, setting forth--
(A) the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States
Armed Forces;
(B) the constitutional and legislative authority under which such
introduction took place; and
(C) the estimated scope and duration of the hostilities or involvement.
(b) The President shall provide such other information as the Congress
may request in the fulfillment of its constitutional responsibilities
with respect to committing the Nation to war and to the use of United
States Armed Forces abroad
(c) Whenever United States Armed Forces are introduced into hostilities
or into any situation described in subsection (a) of this section, the
President shall, so long as such armed forces continue to be engaged in
such hostilities or situation, report to the Congress periodically on
the status of such hostilities or situation as well as on the scope and
duration of such hostilities or situation, but in no event shall he
report to the Congress less often than once every six months.
CONGRESSIONAL ACTION
SEC. 5. (a) Each report submitted pursuant to section 4(a)(1) shall be
transmitted to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the
President pro tempore of the Senate on the same calendar day. Each
report so transmitted shall be referred to the Committee on Foreign
Affairs of the House of Representatives and to the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the Senate for appropriate action. If, when the report is
transmitted, the Congress has adjourned sine die or has adjourned for
any period in excess of three calendar days, the Speaker of the House
of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate, if they
deem it advisable (or if petitioned by at least 30 percent of the
membership of their respective Houses) shall jointly request the
President to convene Congress in order that it may consider the report
and take appropriate action pursuant to this section.
(b) Within sixty calendar days after a report is submitted or is
required to be submitted pursuant to section 4(a)(1), whichever is
earlier, the President shall terminate any use of United States Armed
Forces with respect to which such report was submitted (or required to
be submitted), unless the Congress (1) has declared war or has enacted
a specific authorization for such use of United States Armed Forces,
(2) has extended by law such sixty-day period, or (3) is physically
unable to meet as a result of an armed attack upon the United States.
Such sixty-day period shall be extended for not more than an additional
thirty days if the President determines and certifies to the Congress
in writing that unavoidable military necessity respecting the safety of
United States Armed Forces requires the continued use of such armed
forces in the course of bringing about a prompt removal of such forces.
(c) Notwithstanding subsection (b), at any time that United States
Armed Forces are engaged in hostilities outside the territory of the
United States, its possessions and territories without a declaration of
war or specific statutory authorization, such forces shall be removed
by the President if the Congress so directs by concurrent resolution.
CONGRESSIONAL PRIORITY PROCEDURES FOR JOINT RESOLUTION OR BILL
SEC. 6. (a) Any joint resolution or bill introduced pursuant to section
5(b) at least thirty calendar days before the expiration of the
sixty-day period specified in such section shall be referred to the
Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives or the
Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, as the case may be, and
such committee shall report one such joint resolution or bill, together
with its recommendations, not later than twenty-four calendar days
before the expiration of the sixty-day period specified in such
section, unless such House shall otherwise determine by the yeas and
nays.
(b) Any joint resolution or bill so reported shall become the pending
business of the House in question (in the case of the Senate the time
for debate shall be equally divided between the proponents and the
opponents), and shall be voted on within three calendar days
thereafter, unless such House shall otherwise determine by yeas and
nays.
(c) Such a joint resolution or bill passed by one House shall be
referred to the committee of the other House named in subsection (a)
and shall be reported out not later than fourteen calendar days before
the expiration of the sixty-day period specified in section 5(b). The
joint resolution or bill so reported shall become the pending business
of the House in question and shall be voted on within three calendar
days after it has been reported, unless such House shall otherwise
determine by yeas and nays.
(d) In the case of any disagreement between the two Houses of Congress
with respect to a joint resolution or bill passed by both Houses,
conferees shall be promptly appointed and the committee of conference
shall make and file a report with respect to such resolution or bill
not later than four calendar days before the expiration of the
sixty-day period specified in section 5(b). In the event the conferees
are unable to agree within 48 hours, they shall report back to their
respective Houses in disagreement. Notwithstanding any rule in either
House concerning the printing of conference reports in the Record or
concerning any delay in the consideration of such reports, such report
shall be acted on by both Houses not later than the expiration of such
sixty-day period.
CONGRESSIONAL PRIORITY PROCEDURES FOR CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
SEC. 7. (a) Any concurrent resolution introduced pursuant to section
5(b) at least thirty calendar days before the expiration of the
sixty-day period specified in such section shall be referred to the
Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives or the
Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, as the case may be, and
one such concurrent resolution shall be reported out by such committee
together with its recommendations within fifteen calendar days, unless
such House shall otherwise determine by the yeas and nays.
(b) Any concurrent resolution so reported shall become the pending
business of the House in question (in the case of the Senate the time
for debate shall be equally divided between the proponents and the
opponents), and shall be voted on within three calendar days
thereafter, unless such House shall otherwise determine by yeas and
nays.
(c) Such a concurrent resolution passed by one House shall be referred
to the committee of the other House named in subsection (a) and shall
be reported out by such committee together with its recommendations
within fifteen calendar days and shall thereupon become the pending
business of such House and shall be voted on within three calendar days
after it has been reported, unless such House shall otherwise determine
by yeas and nays.
(d) In the case of any disagreement between the two Houses of Congress
with respect to a concurrent resolution passed by both Houses,
conferees shall be promptly appointed and the committee of conference
shall make and file a report with respect to such concurrent resolution
within six calendar days after the legislation is referred to the
committee of conference. Notwithstanding any rule in either House
concerning the printing of conference reports in the Record or
concerning any delay in the consideration of such reports, such report
shall be acted on by both Houses not later than six calendar days after
the conference report is filed. In the event the conferees are unable
to agree within 48 hours, they shall report back to their respective
Houses in disagreement.
INTERPRETATION OF JOINT RESOLUTION
SEC. 8. (a) Authority to introduce United States Armed Forces into
hostilities or into situations wherein involvement in hostilities is
clearly indicated by the circumstances shall not be inferred--
(1) from any provision of law (whether or not in effect before the date
of the enactment of this joint resolution), including any provision
contained in any appropriation Act, unless such provision specifically
authorizes the introduction of United States Armed Forces into
hostilities or into such situations and stating that it is intended to
constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of this
joint resolution; or
(2) from any treaty heretofore or hereafter ratified unless such treaty
is implemented by legislation specifically authorizing the introduction
of United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into such situations
and stating that it is intended to constitute specific statutory
authorization within the meaning of this joint resolution.
(b) Nothing in this joint resolution shall be construed to require any
further specific statutory authorization to permit members of United
States Armed Forces to participate jointly with members of the armed
forces of one or more foreign countries in the headquarters operations
of high-level military commands which were established prior to the
date of enactment of this joint resolution and pursuant to the United
Nations Charter or any treaty ratified by the United States prior to
such date.
(c) For purposes of this joint resolution, the term "introduction of
United States Armed Forces" includes the assignment of member of such
armed forces to command, coordinate, participate in the movement of, or
accompany the regular or irregular military forces of any foreign
country or government when such military forces are engaged, or there
exists an imminent threat that such forces will become engaged, in
hostilities.
(d) Nothing in this joint resolution--
(1) is intended to alter the constitutional authority of the Congress
or of the President, or the provision of existing treaties; or
(2) shall be construed as granting any authority to the President with
respect to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into
hostilities or into situations wherein involvement in hostilities is
clearly indicated by the circumstances which authority he would not
have had in the absence of this joint resolution.
SEPARABILITY CLAUSE
SEC. 9. If any provision of this joint resolution or the application
thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of
the joint resolution and the application of such provision to any other
person or circumstance shall not be affected thereby.
EFFECTIVE DATE
SEC. 10. This joint resolution shall take effect on the date of its
enactment.
CARL ALBERT
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
JAMES O. EASTLAND
President of the Senate pro tempore.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S.,
November 7, 1973.
The House of Representatives having proceeded to reconsider the
resolution (H. J. Res 542) entitled "Joint resolution concerning the
war powers of Congress and the President", returned by the President of
the United States with his objections, to the House of Representatives,
in which it originated, it was
Resolved, That the said resolution pass, two-thirds of the House of
Representatives agreeing to pass the same.
Attest:
W=2E PAT JENNINGS
Clerk.
I certify that this Joint Resolution originated in the House of
Representatives.
W=2E PAT JENNINGS
Clerk.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
November 7, 1973
The Senate having proceeded to reconsider the joint resolution (H. J.
Res. 542) entitled "Joint resolution concerning the war powers of
Congress and the President", returned by the President of the United
States with his objections to the House of Representatives, in which it
originate, it was
Resolved, That the said joint resolution pass, two-thirds of the
Senators present having voted in the affirmative.
Attest:
FRANCIS R. VALEO
Secretary.
Global Research Articles by Francis Boyle
| Global Research RSS Feed
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole
responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of
the Centre for Research on Globalization.
To become a Member of Global Research
The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research
articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are
not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed.
For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms
including commercial internet sites, contact:
www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We
are making such material available to our readers under the provisions
of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of
political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to
use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must
request permission from the copyright owner.
For media inquiries:
=C2=A9 Copyright Francis Boyle, Global Research, 2007
The url address of this article is:
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=3DviewArticle&code=3DBOY20070120&ar=
ticleId=3D4528
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin The Paranoid Android" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
15 Jan 2007 08:23:28 AM |
|
|
Makes perfect sense.
Cheney and Bush realize they'll never stabilize Iraq and have a
U.S.-Friendly gov't installed there byt the time they leave or are
removed from office. The risk is that Iraq will end up becoming allied
with Iran. This is bad, bad, bad ... so the answer is to take out Iran
or get the U.S. so embroiled in a much wider conflict in the area that
the Dem's will have no choice but to continue the committment of men
and money. The raid on the Iranian embassy in Iraq doesn't look either
-- wonder what kind of incriminating documents they'll come across??
Possibly there will be a draft or something similar with a different
spin to it.
-- Marvin
Docrodile wrote:
U.S military strike on Iran seen by April, 2007: Kuwait media
U.S. might launch a military strike on Iran before April 2007,
Kuwait-based daily Arab Times released on Sunday said in a report.
The report, written by Arab Times' Editor-in-chief Ahmed al- Jarallah
citing a reliable source, said that the attack would be launched from the
sea, while Patriot missiles would guard all Arab countries in the Gulf.
Recent statements emanating from the United States indicated the Bush
administration's new strategy for Iraq doesn't include any proposal to
make a compromise or negotiate with Syria or Iran, added the report.
The source told al-Jarallah that U.S. President George W. Bush recently
had held a meeting with Vice President ***** Cheney, Defense Secretary
Robert Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other assistants in
the White House, where they discussed the plan to attack Iran in minute
detail.
Vice President ***** Cheney highlighted the threat posed by Iran to not
only Saudi Arabia but also the whole Gulf region, according to the source.
"Tehran is not playing politics. Iranian leaders are using their country's
religious influence to support the aggressive regime's ambition to
expand," ***** Cheney was quoted by the source as saying.
Indicating participants of the meeting agreed to impose restrictions on
the ambitions of Iranian regime before April 2007 without exposing other
countries in the region to any danger, the source said "they have chosen
April as British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said it will be the last
month in office for him. The United States has to take action against Iran
and Syria before April 2007."
Claiming the attack will be launched from the sea and not from any country
in the region, he said "the U.S. and its allies will target the oil
installations and nuclear facilities of Iran ensuring there is no
environmental catastrophe or after effects."
The source added that the U.S. has started sending its warships to the
Gulf and the build-up would continue until Washington has the required
number by the end of this month.
"U.S. forces in Iraq and other countries in the region will be protected
against any Iranian missile attack by an advanced Patriot missile system,"
the source noted.
The Bush administration believes that attacking Iran will create a new
power balance in the region, calming down the situation in Iraq and paving
the way for their democratic project, which have to be suspended due to
the interference of Tehran and Damascus in Iraq, according to the source.
Source: Xinhua
http://english.people.com.cn/200701/15/eng20070115_341128.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Docrodile" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
16 Jan 2007 01:25:29 PM |
|
|
Marv, this country is embroiled in a sick, wasting mess of such
hideousness and deception, such greed and power madness, totally consumed
in it now and flailing away at each other, at the leaders, and at God
Himself...what horror and injustice and dishonesty, what murder and
madness, hate and revenge, this man and his cohorts have brought upon us
all...you can't even turn on the tube without hearing long obsessive,
tiresome analyses, opinions, hand-wringing, blame and counter blame,
disillusionment, perplexity...come pouring outta' that advertising box
like a tidal wave of depressive ***** that speaks to how deeply this
species is cutting a deeper and deeper rut for itself with its insane
destructive, self centered behaviour.
It just piles on us day after day, as we wobble off to do our everyday
crap, trying to keep from being drowned in the oppressive sick
machinations of the powerful and rich, or the pathetic public prostitutes
out there still amazingly spreading their spider-veined legs for one more
slimy ***** by them.
Egads...pinch me and wake me from this seemingly eternal nightmare...Lord
god in heaven...
Docrodile :)~
"Marvin The Paranoid Android" <marvinparanoidandroid@hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:1168871008.718831.296230@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Makes perfect sense.
Cheney and Bush realize they'll never stabilize Iraq and have a
U.S.-Friendly gov't installed there byt the time they leave or are
removed from office. The risk is that Iraq will end up becoming allied
with Iran. This is bad, bad, bad ... so the answer is to take out Iran
or get the U.S. so embroiled in a much wider conflict in the area that
the Dem's will have no choice but to continue the committment of men
and money. The raid on the Iranian embassy in Iraq doesn't look either
-- wonder what kind of incriminating documents they'll come across??
Possibly there will be a draft or something similar with a different
spin to it.
-- Marvin
Docrodile wrote:
U.S military strike on Iran seen by April, 2007: Kuwait media
U.S. might launch a military strike on Iran before April 2007,
Kuwait-based daily Arab Times released on Sunday said in a report.
The report, written by Arab Times' Editor-in-chief Ahmed al- Jarallah
citing a reliable source, said that the attack would be launched from
the
sea, while Patriot missiles would guard all Arab countries in the Gulf.
Recent statements emanating from the United States indicated the Bush
administration's new strategy for Iraq doesn't include any proposal to
make a compromise or negotiate with Syria or Iran, added the report.
The source told al-Jarallah that U.S. President George W. Bush recently
had held a meeting with Vice President ***** Cheney, Defense Secretary
Robert Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other assistants
in
the White House, where they discussed the plan to attack Iran in minute
detail.
Vice President ***** Cheney highlighted the threat posed by Iran to not
only Saudi Arabia but also the whole Gulf region, according to the
source.
"Tehran is not playing politics. Iranian leaders are using their
country's
religious influence to support the aggressive regime's ambition to
expand," ***** Cheney was quoted by the source as saying.
Indicating participants of the meeting agreed to impose restrictions on
the ambitions of Iranian regime before April 2007 without exposing
other
countries in the region to any danger, the source said "they have
chosen
April as British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said it will be the last
month in office for him. The United States has to take action against
Iran
and Syria before April 2007."
Claiming the attack will be launched from the sea and not from any
country
in the region, he said "the U.S. and its allies will target the oil
installations and nuclear facilities of Iran ensuring there is no
environmental catastrophe or after effects."
The source added that the U.S. has started sending its warships to the
Gulf and the build-up would continue until Washington has the required
number by the end of this month.
"U.S. forces in Iraq and other countries in the region will be
protected
against any Iranian missile attack by an advanced Patriot missile
system,"
the source noted.
The Bush administration believes that attacking Iran will create a new
power balance in the region, calming down the situation in Iraq and
paving
the way for their democratic project, which have to be suspended due to
the interference of Tehran and Damascus in Iraq, according to the
source.
Source: Xinhua
http://english.people.com.cn/200701/15/eng20070115_341128.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin The Paranoid Android" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
17 Jan 2007 06:47:04 AM |
|
|
Oh, I've updated my fucking site too ... :-D
http://ca.geocities.com/marvie_the_paranoid_android/index.html
Added a 'Videos' section with some of The Chimp's more psychotic
interviews captured on film and a couple of cartoon's on the main page,
and a 'Surge' photo on the photo's page.
Cheers!
-- Marvin
Docrodile wrote:
Marv, this country is embroiled in a sick, wasting mess of such
hideousness and deception, such greed and power madness, totally consumed
in it now and flailing away at each other, at the leaders, and at God
Himself...what horror and injustice and dishonesty, what murder and
madness, hate and revenge, this man and his cohorts have brought upon us
all...you can't even turn on the tube without hearing long obsessive,
tiresome analyses, opinions, hand-wringing, blame and counter blame,
disillusionment, perplexity...come pouring outta' that advertising box
like a tidal wave of depressive ***** that speaks to how deeply this
species is cutting a deeper and deeper rut for itself with its insane
destructive, self centered behaviour.
It just piles on us day after day, as we wobble off to do our everyday
crap, trying to keep from being drowned in the oppressive sick
machinations of the powerful and rich, or the pathetic public prostitutes
out there still amazingly spreading their spider-veined legs for one more
slimy ***** by them.
Egads...pinch me and wake me from this seemingly eternal nightmare...Lord
god in heaven...
Docrodile :)~
"Marvin The Paranoid Android" <marvinparanoidandroid@hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:1168871008.718831.296230@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Makes perfect sense.
Cheney and Bush realize they'll never stabilize Iraq and have a
U.S.-Friendly gov't installed there byt the time they leave or are
removed from office. The risk is that Iraq will end up becoming allied
with Iran. This is bad, bad, bad ... so the answer is to take out Iran
or get the U.S. so embroiled in a much wider conflict in the area that
the Dem's will have no choice but to continue the committment of men
and money. The raid on the Iranian embassy in Iraq doesn't look either
-- wonder what kind of incriminating documents they'll come across??
Possibly there will be a draft or something similar with a different
spin to it.
-- Marvin
Docrodile wrote:
U.S military strike on Iran seen by April, 2007: Kuwait media
U.S. might launch a military strike on Iran before April 2007,
Kuwait-based daily Arab Times released on Sunday said in a report.
The report, written by Arab Times' Editor-in-chief Ahmed al- Jarallah
citing a reliable source, said that the attack would be launched from
the
sea, while Patriot missiles would guard all Arab countries in the Gulf.
Recent statements emanating from the United States indicated the Bush
administration's new strategy for Iraq doesn't include any proposal to
make a compromise or negotiate with Syria or Iran, added the report.
The source told al-Jarallah that U.S. President George W. Bush recently
had held a meeting with Vice President ***** Cheney, Defense Secretary
Robert Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other assistants
in
the White House, where they discussed the plan to attack Iran in minute
detail.
Vice President ***** Cheney highlighted the threat posed by Iran to not
only Saudi Arabia but also the whole Gulf region, according to the
source.
"Tehran is not playing politics. Iranian leaders are using their
country's
religious influence to support the aggressive regime's ambition to
expand," ***** Cheney was quoted by the source as saying.
Indicating participants of the meeting agreed to impose restrictions on
the ambitions of Iranian regime before April 2007 without exposing
other
countries in the region to any danger, the source said "they have
chosen
April as British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said it will be the last
month in office for him. The United States has to take action against
Iran
and Syria before April 2007."
Claiming the attack will be launched from the sea and not from any
country
in the region, he said "the U.S. and its allies will target the oil
installations and nuclear facilities of Iran ensuring there is no
environmental catastrophe or after effects."
The source added that the U.S. has started sending its warships to the
Gulf and the build-up would continue until Washington has the required
number by the end of this month.
"U.S. forces in Iraq and other countries in the region will be
protected
against any Iranian missile attack by an advanced Patriot missile
system,"
the source noted.
The Bush administration believes that attacking Iran will create a new
power balance in the region, calming down the situation in Iraq and
paving
the way for their democratic project, which have to be suspended due to
the interference of Tehran and Damascus in Iraq, according to the
source.
Source: Xinhua
http://english.people.com.cn/200701/15/eng20070115_341128.html
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin The Paranoid Android" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
17 Jan 2007 05:57:48 AM |
|
|
Today I'm driving a Cambodian lady, who was sponsored sixteen years ago
by a church group to live here in Canada, to a medical appt at a
hospital in 'The City' -- we abandoned The City a couple of years ago
for a more slower pace of life. This lady's daughter, who was 2 at the
time when she arrived in Canada, is now a student at a the local
university.
Friday I'll be taking an 85 yr old blind lady for dialysis at another
hospital in The City. It's a double drive, take her in the morning and
pick her up in the afternoon. She's my 'regular' Friday drive.
I don't watch TV. I do read a fair bit from the internet but nowhere
near what I used to.
There's still a lot of good happening out there. But I agree something
has to be done to stop the insanity that has taken over the White
House. Impeachment seems to be the only way. Cheney may find himself in
deep ***** with "Scooters's" shenanigans -- the charges are obstruction
but it's the motive that will be the focus.
Take care Doc!
Cheers!
-- Marvin
Docrodile wrote:
Marv, this country is embroiled in a sick, wasting mess of such
hideousness and deception, such greed and power madness, totally consumed
in it now and flailing away at each other, at the leaders, and at God
Himself...what horror and injustice and dishonesty, what murder and
madness, hate and revenge, this man and his cohorts have brought upon us
all...you can't even turn on the tube without hearing long obsessive,
tiresome analyses, opinions, hand-wringing, blame and counter blame,
disillusionment, perplexity...come pouring outta' that advertising box
like a tidal wave of depressive ***** that speaks to how deeply this
species is cutting a deeper and deeper rut for itself with its insane
destructive, self centered behaviour.
It just piles on us day after day, as we wobble off to do our everyday
crap, trying to keep from being drowned in the oppressive sick
machinations of the powerful and rich, or the pathetic public prostitutes
out there still amazingly spreading their spider-veined legs for one more
slimy ***** by them.
Egads...pinch me and wake me from this seemingly eternal nightmare...Lord
god in heaven...
Docrodile :)~
"Marvin The Paranoid Android" <marvinparanoidandroid@hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:1168871008.718831.296230@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Makes perfect sense.
Cheney and Bush realize they'll never stabilize Iraq and have a
U.S.-Friendly gov't installed there byt the time they leave or are
removed from office. The risk is that Iraq will end up becoming allied
with Iran. This is bad, bad, bad ... so the answer is to take out Iran
or get the U.S. so embroiled in a much wider conflict in the area that
the Dem's will have no choice but to continue the committment of men
and money. The raid on the Iranian embassy in Iraq doesn't look either
-- wonder what kind of incriminating documents they'll come across??
Possibly there will be a draft or something similar with a different
spin to it.
-- Marvin
Docrodile wrote:
U.S military strike on Iran seen by April, 2007: Kuwait media
U.S. might launch a military strike on Iran before April 2007,
Kuwait-based daily Arab Times released on Sunday said in a report.
The report, written by Arab Times' Editor-in-chief Ahmed al- Jarallah
citing a reliable source, said that the attack would be launched from
the
sea, while Patriot missiles would guard all Arab countries in the Gulf.
Recent statements emanating from the United States indicated the Bush
administration's new strategy for Iraq doesn't include any proposal to
make a compromise or negotiate with Syria or Iran, added the report.
The source told al-Jarallah that U.S. President George W. Bush recently
had held a meeting with Vice President ***** Cheney, Defense Secretary
Robert Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other assistants
in
the White House, where they discussed the plan to attack Iran in minute
detail.
Vice President ***** Cheney highlighted the threat posed by Iran to not
only Saudi Arabia but also the whole Gulf region, according to the
source.
"Tehran is not playing politics. Iranian leaders are using their
country's
religious influence to support the aggressive regime's ambition to
expand," ***** Cheney was quoted by the source as saying.
Indicating participants of the meeting agreed to impose restrictions on
the ambitions of Iranian regime before April 2007 without exposing
other
countries in the region to any danger, the source said "they have
chosen
April as British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said it will be the last
month in office for him. The United States has to take action against
Iran
and Syria before April 2007."
Claiming the attack will be launched from the sea and not from any
country
in the region, he said "the U.S. and its allies will target the oil
installations and nuclear facilities of Iran ensuring there is no
environmental catastrophe or after effects."
The source added that the U.S. has started sending its warships to the
Gulf and the build-up would continue until Washington has the required
number by the end of this month.
"U.S. forces in Iraq and other countries in the region will be
protected
against any Iranian missile attack by an advanced Patriot missile
system,"
the source noted.
The Bush administration believes that attacking Iran will create a new
power balance in the region, calming down the situation in Iraq and
paving
the way for their democratic project, which have to be suspended due to
the interference of Tehran and Damascus in Iraq, according to the
source.
Source: Xinhua
http://english.people.com.cn/200701/15/eng20070115_341128.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dr. Bipolar" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
19 Jan 2007 05:36:00 AM |
|
|
Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:
Today I'm driving a Cambodian lady, who was sponsored sixteen years ago
by a church group to live here in Canada, to a medical appt at a
hospital in 'The City' -- we abandoned The City a couple of years ago
for a more slower pace of life. This lady's daughter, who was 2 at the
time when she arrived in Canada, is now a student at a the local
university.
Friday I'll be taking an 85 yr old blind lady for dialysis at another
hospital in The City. It's a double drive, take her in the morning and
pick her up in the afternoon. She's my 'regular' Friday drive.
I don't watch TV. I do read a fair bit from the internet but nowhere
near what I used to.
There's still a lot of good happening out there. But I agree something
has to be done to stop the insanity that has taken over the White
House. Impeachment seems to be the only way. Cheney may find himself in
deep ***** with "Scooters's" shenanigans -- the charges are obstruction
but it's the motive that will be the focus.
Take care Doc!
Cheers!
-- Marvin
Yes, you're so right, Marv -- there is much good going on in the
species, as has always been the case, historically. However, it just
takes a relative handful of bad apples...and we got 'em right now, on
both sides of the goldfish bowl. I don't want to give the impression
that humanity is a lost cause, a meaningless thing in the universe. It
is not. If I believed it was, I would not be able to go on and enjoy
anything. There are many people helping others in so many different
ways, and helping the environment to be better and protecting animals,
etc. It's just a crying outrage that self-centered, delusional,
fanatical leaders have done so much damage to the species throughout
history. It makes one want to support 'forced genetic alteration' of
homo sapiens! LOL! Well, almost...I don't want us to get into reaching
for a genetically produced utopian existence -- which I believe some
are pressing for in this world. There is a desperate tone underlying
the incessant nervous depressed chatter online these days, with more
references to the 'futility' of our species' collective behavior. A
wringing of hands about how we can head off catastrophe, and a
perplexity engulfing us seemingly more often now, as to how we might
change the way we are. I think crappy insane leaders actually have an
ironic beneficial effect on the human consciousness -- they starkly
show deficiencies in our mental make-up, social organization, belief
paradigms, et al. In that respect, Bush, Cheney, Blair, Ohmert,
Ahmadhinejad, Jong-Il, etc., provide a strange anthropological
self-revelation for all of us to think carefully about.
Where are we going, and how might we best proceed, to the collective
benefit of all peoples on the planet? The question vexes us...
Dr. Bipolar
Docrodile wrote:
Marv, this country is embroiled in a sick, wasting mess of such
hideousness and deception, such greed and power madness, totally consumed
in it now and flailing away at each other, at the leaders, and at God
Himself...what horror and injustice and dishonesty, what murder and
madness, hate and revenge, this man and his cohorts have brought upon us
all...you can't even turn on the tube without hearing long obsessive,
tiresome analyses, opinions, hand-wringing, blame and counter blame,
disillusionment, perplexity...come pouring outta' that advertising box
like a tidal wave of depressive ***** that speaks to how deeply this
species is cutting a deeper and deeper rut for itself with its insane
destructive, self centered behaviour.
It just piles on us day after day, as we wobble off to do our everyday
crap, trying to keep from being drowned in the oppressive sick
machinations of the powerful and rich, or the pathetic public prostitutes
out there still amazingly spreading their spider-veined legs for one more
slimy ***** by them.
Egads...pinch me and wake me from this seemingly eternal nightmare...Lord
god in heaven...
Docrodile :)~
"Marvin The Paranoid Android" <marvinparanoidandroid@hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:1168871008.718831.296230@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Makes perfect sense.
Cheney and Bush realize they'll never stabilize Iraq and have a
U.S.-Friendly gov't installed there byt the time they leave or are
removed from office. The risk is that Iraq will end up becoming allied
with Iran. This is bad, bad, bad ... so the answer is to take out Iran
or get the U.S. so embroiled in a much wider conflict in the area that
the Dem's will have no choice but to continue the committment of men
and money. The raid on the Iranian embassy in Iraq doesn't look either
-- wonder what kind of incriminating documents they'll come across??
Possibly there will be a draft or something similar with a different
spin to it.
-- Marvin
Docrodile wrote:
U.S military strike on Iran seen by April, 2007: Kuwait media
U.S. might launch a military strike on Iran before April 2007,
Kuwait-based daily Arab Times released on Sunday said in a report.
The report, written by Arab Times' Editor-in-chief Ahmed al- Jarallah
citing a reliable source, said that the attack would be launched from
the
sea, while Patriot missiles would guard all Arab countries in the Gulf.
Recent statements emanating from the United States indicated the Bush
administration's new strategy for Iraq doesn't include any proposal to
make a compromise or negotiate with Syria or Iran, added the report.
The source told al-Jarallah that U.S. President George W. Bush recently
had held a meeting with Vice President ***** Cheney, Defense Secretary
Robert Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other assistants
in
the White House, where they discussed the plan to attack Iran in minute
detail.
Vice President ***** Cheney highlighted the threat posed by Iran to not
only Saudi Arabia but also the whole Gulf region, according to the
source.
"Tehran is not playing politics. Iranian leaders are using their
country's
religious influence to support the aggressive regime's ambition to
expand," ***** Cheney was quoted by the source as saying.
Indicating participants of the meeting agreed to impose restrictions on
the ambitions of Iranian regime before April 2007 without exposing
other
countries in the region to any danger, the source said "they have
chosen
April as British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said it will be the last
month in office for him. The United States has to take action against
Iran
and Syria before April 2007."
Claiming the attack will be launched from the sea and not from any
country
in the region, he said "the U.S. and its allies will target the oil
installations and nuclear facilities of Iran ensuring there is no
environmental catastrophe or after effects."
The source added that the U.S. has started sending its warships to the
Gulf and the build-up would continue until Washington has the required
number by the end of this month.
"U.S. forces in Iraq and other countries in the region will be
protected
against any Iranian missile attack by an advanced Patriot missile
system,"
the source noted.
The Bush administration believes that attacking Iran will create a new
power balance in the region, calming down the situation in Iraq and
paving
the way for their democratic project, which have to be suspended due to
the interference of Tehran and Damascus in Iraq, according to the
source.
Source: Xinhua
http://english.people.com.cn/200701/15/eng20070115_341128.html
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
15 Jan 2007 05:01:22 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 06:23:28 -0800, Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:
Makes perfect sense.
Cheney and Bush realize they'll never stabilize Iraq and have a
U.S.-Friendly gov't installed there byt the time they leave or are
removed from office. The risk is that Iraq will end up becoming allied
with Iran. This is bad, bad, bad ... so the answer is to take out Iran
or get the U.S. so embroiled in a much wider conflict in the area that
the Dem's will have no choice but to continue the committment of men
and money. The raid on the Iranian embassy in Iraq doesn't look either
-- wonder what kind of incriminating documents they'll come across??
Possibly there will be a draft or something similar with a different
spin to it.
-- Marvin
Has it crossed anyone's mind that Bush & Co. may have given Saudi Arabia
lots, lots more than it should have (and maybe even more than is legal)?
Does it not seem like Bush & Co's style to send Americans to their deaths
to avoid anyone finding out something like that, rather than risk
exposure? Didn't Saudi Arabia recently come out and say that they would
go in and protect their Sunni brothers against the Shiites? Logically, what
does the United States care, really, if Saudi Arabia wants to go in to
keep the peace? Logically, what does anyone outside of Islam really care
about infighting between two Muslim sects? Other than being unstable, but
it's no like that's bothered Bush at any time in the past ...
Conjecture on my part, but it seems very odd that the surge, increased
military activity, etc, started only after Saudi Arabia said that. I think
Bush is scared of the American public finding out what he's really been up
to, and will do anything to avoid being found out. Either that, or he's
completely nuts and really believes he's some kind of emperor.
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "Docrodile" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
16 Jan 2007 01:06:54 PM |
|
|
You know, as I listened to a CNN correspondent obsess about the gory
details of Saddam's brother's head being severed as he was hanged, it
struck me (again) how sick and ugly all this ***** is that Bush has gotten
us into...and then the image of him acting all humble about some of his
'mistakes' (as he's done before when under tremendous criticism, low
popularity) while simultaneously acting militaristic and stupidly
committed to a huge lying blunder he created...by telling us all he's
gonna' go into Iraq and beat the crap outta' those people even more...and
damn Congress or the American public (as he damned the UN four years
ago)...well, *****, it all just came to roost again in such a demented,
chilling way for a moment as I watched the tube...as that nervous
correspondent went over the same details of the horrific hanging again and
again.
Docrodile
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.01.15.23.01.22.229679@tepidmail.com...
On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 06:23:28 -0800, Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:
Makes perfect sense.
Cheney and Bush realize they'll never stabilize Iraq and have a
U.S.-Friendly gov't installed there byt the time they leave or are
removed from office. The risk is that Iraq will end up becoming allied
with Iran. This is bad, bad, bad ... so the answer is to take out Iran
or get the U.S. so embroiled in a much wider conflict in the area that
the Dem's will have no choice but to continue the committment of men
and money. The raid on the Iranian embassy in Iraq doesn't look either
-- wonder what kind of incriminating documents they'll come across??
Possibly there will be a draft or something similar with a different
spin to it.
-- Marvin
Has it crossed anyone's mind that Bush & Co. may have given Saudi Arabia
lots, lots more than it should have (and maybe even more than is legal)?
Does it not seem like Bush & Co's style to send Americans to their
deaths
to avoid anyone finding out something like that, rather than risk
exposure? Didn't Saudi Arabia recently come out and say that they would
go in and protect their Sunni brothers against the Shiites? Logically,
what
does the United States care, really, if Saudi Arabia wants to go in to
keep the peace? Logically, what does anyone outside of Islam really
care
about infighting between two Muslim sects? Other than being unstable,
but
it's no like that's bothered Bush at any time in the past ...
Conjecture on my part, but it seems very odd that the surge, increased
military activity, etc, started only after Saudi Arabia said that. I
think
Bush is scared of the American public finding out what he's really been
up
to, and will do anything to avoid being found out. Either that, or he's
completely nuts and really believes he's some kind of emperor.
Woods
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "=?utf-8?B?4pi6IC7CtzoqwqjCqCo6wrcuwrc6KsKowqgqOsK3LiAg4pmlIFdvcmxkIFdhciBJSUkgMjAwNywgVGhlIExhc3QgMjAwMCBEYXlzLi4uSE9PUk9PICEgIC7CtzoqwqjCqCo6wrcuIOKZpeKYusKpwq7ihKI=?=" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL 2007; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
21 Jan 2007 05:58:13 PM |
|
|
U.S. plans envision broad attack on Iran: analyst
Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:49 PM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. contingency planning for military action
against Iran's nuclear program goes beyond limited strikes and would
effectively unleash a war against the country, a former U.S.
intelligence analyst said on Friday.
"I've seen some of the planning ... You're not talking about a surgical
strike," said Wayne White, who was a top Middle East analyst for the
State Department's bureau of intelligence and research until March
2005.
"You're talking about a war against Iran" that likely would destabilize
the Middle East for years, White told the Middle East Policy Council, a
Washington think tank.
"We're not talking about just surgical strikes against an array of
targets inside Iran. We're talking about clearing a path to the
targets" by taking out much of the Iranian Air Force, Kilo submarines,
anti-ship missiles that could target commerce or U.S. warships in the
Gulf, and maybe even Iran's ballistic missile capability, White said.
"I'm much more worried about the consequences of a U.S. or Israeli
attack against Iran's nuclear infrastructure," which would prompt
vigorous Iranian retaliation, he said, than civil war in Iraq, which
could be confined to that country.
President George W. Bush has stressed he is seeking a diplomatic
solution to the dispute over Iran's nuclear program.
But he has not taken the military option off the table and his recent
rhetoric, plus tougher financial sanctions and actions against Iranian
involvement in Iraq, has revived talk in Washington about a possible
U.S. attack on Iran.
The Bush administration and many of its Gulf allies have expressed
growing concern about Iran's rising influence in the region and the
prospect of it acquiring a nuclear weapon.
Middle East expert Kenneth Katzman argued "Iran's ascendancy is not
only manageable but reversible" if one understands the Islamic
republic's many vulnerabilities.
Tehran's leaders have convinced many experts Iran is a great nation
verging on "superpower" status, but the country is "very weak ... (and)
meets almost no known criteria to be considered a great nation," said
Katzman of the Library of Congress' Congressional Research Service.
The economy is mismanaged and "quite primitive," exporting almost
nothing except oil, he said.
Also, Iran's oil production capacity is fast declining and in terms of
conventional military power, "Iran is a virtual non-entity," Katzman
added.
The administration, therefore, should not go out of its way to
accommodate Iran because the country is in no position to hurt the
United States, and at some point "it might be useful to call that
bluff," he said.
But Katzman cautioned against early confrontation with Iran and said if
there is a "grand bargain" that meets both countries' interests, that
should be pursued.
====================================
Docrodile wrote:
U.S military strike on Iran seen by April, 2007: Kuwait media
U.S. might launch a military strike on Iran before April 2007,
Kuwait-based daily Arab Times released on Sunday said in a report.
The report, written by Arab Times' Editor-in-chief Ahmed al- Jarallah
citing a reliable source, said that the attack would be launched from the
sea, while Patriot missiles would guard all Arab countries in the Gulf.
Recent statements emanating from the United States indicated the Bush
administration's new strategy for Iraq doesn't include any proposal to
make a compromise or negotiate with Syria or Iran, added the report.
The source told al-Jarallah that U.S. President George W. Bush recently
had held a meeting with Vice President ***** Cheney, Defense Secretary
Robert Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other assistants in
the White House, where they discussed the plan to attack Iran in minute
detail.
Vice President ***** Cheney highlighted the threat posed by Iran to not
only Saudi Arabia but also the whole Gulf region, according to the source.
"Tehran is not playing politics. Iranian leaders are using their country's
religious influence to support the aggressive regime's ambition to
expand," ***** Cheney was quoted by the source as saying.
Indicating participants of the meeting agreed to impose restrictions on
the ambitions of Iranian regime before April 2007 without exposing other
countries in the region to any danger, the source said "they have chosen
April as British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said it will be the last
month in office for him. The United States has to take action against Iran
and Syria before April 2007."
Claiming the attack will be launched from the sea and not from any country
in the region, he said "the U.S. and its allies will target the oil
installations and nuclear facilities of Iran ensuring there is no
environmental catastrophe or after effects."
The source added that the U.S. has started sending its warships to the
Gulf and the build-up would continue until Washington has the required
number by the end of this month.
"U.S. forces in Iraq and other countries in the region will be protected
against any Iranian missile attack by an advanced Patriot missile system,"
the source noted.
The Bush administration believes that attacking Iran will create a new
power balance in the region, calming down the situation in Iraq and paving
the way for their democratic project, which have to be suspended due to
the interference of Tehran and Damascus in Iraq, according to the source.
Source: Xinhua
http://english.people.com.cn/200701/15/eng20070115_341128.html
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "=?utf-8?B?4pi6IC7CtzoqwqjCqCo6wrcuwrc6KsKowqgqOsK3LiAg4pmlIFdvcmxkIFdhciBJSUkgMjAwNywgVGhlIExhc3QgMjAwMCBEYXlzLi4uSE9PUk9PICEgIC7CtzoqwqjCqCo6wrcuIOKZpeKYusKpwq7ihKI=?=" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
15 Jan 2007 09:56:45 PM |
|
|
Well then, Doc, as John F. Lemke sez;
We're all fricked !
HOOROO =E2=98=BA
UNCLE WALLY =E2=98=BA
PS READ THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE AND TELL ME WHAT U THINK !
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D0=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2007020467,00.html
Doom looms for nuclear clock
January 16, 2007
THE Doomsday Clock =E2=80=94 which counts down to nuclear Armageddon =E2=80=
=94 is
to have its hands moved forward.
University of Chicago boffins, who run the clock, are acting on rising
fears over nuclear threats in Iran and North Korea, and unsecured
atomic materials in Russia.
Midnight on the clock is =E2=80=98the end of the world=E2=80=99. It has sho=
wn
11.53pm since 2002 when the US rejected a series of arms control
treaties.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Docrodile wrote:
U.S military strike on Iran seen by April, 2007: Kuwait media
U.S. might launch a military strike on Iran before April 2007,
Kuwait-based daily Arab Times released on Sunday said in a report.
The report, written by Arab Times' Editor-in-chief Ahmed al- Jarallah
citing a reliable source, said that the attack would be launched from the
sea, while Patriot missiles would guard all Arab countries in the Gulf.
Recent statements emanating from the United States indicated the Bush
administration's new strategy for Iraq doesn't include any proposal to
make a compromise or negotiate with Syria or Iran, added the report.
The source told al-Jarallah that U.S. President George W. Bush recently
had held a meeting with Vice President ***** Cheney, Defense Secretary
Robert Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other assistants in
the White House, where they discussed the plan to attack Iran in minute
detail.
Vice President ***** Cheney highlighted the threat posed by Iran to not
only Saudi Arabia but also the whole Gulf region, according to the source.
"Tehran is not playing politics. Iranian leaders are using their country's
religious influence to support the aggressive regime's ambition to
expand," ***** Cheney was quoted by the source as saying.
Indicating participants of the meeting agreed to impose restrictions on
the ambitions of Iranian regime before April 2007 without exposing other
countries in the region to any danger, the source said "they have chosen
April as British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said it will be the last
month in office for him. The United States has to take action against Iran
and Syria before April 2007."
Claiming the attack will be launched from the sea and not from any country
in the region, he said "the U.S. and its allies will target the oil
installations and nuclear facilities of Iran ensuring there is no
environmental catastrophe or after effects."
The source added that the U.S. has started sending its warships to the
Gulf and the build-up would continue until Washington has the required
number by the end of this month.
"U.S. forces in Iraq and other countries in the region will be protected
against any Iranian missile attack by an advanced Patriot missile system,"
the source noted.
The Bush administration believes that attacking Iran will create a new
power balance in the region, calming down the situation in Iraq and paving
the way for their democratic project, which have to be suspended due to
the interference of Tehran and Damascus in Iraq, according to the source.
Source: Xinhua
http://english.people.com.cn/200701/15/eng20070115_341128.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Docrodile" |
|
| Title: Re: KUWAIT MEDIA SAYS U.S. MILITARY STRIKE ON IRAN IN APRIL; US NAVAL BUILD-UP CONTINUES |
16 Jan 2007 12:56:52 PM |
|
|
"☺ .·:*¨¨*:·.·:*¨¨*:·. ♥ World War III 2007, The Last 2000 Days...HOOROO !
..·:*¨¨*:·. ♥☺©®™" <stargatedecember2012@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:1168919805.894756.312600@s34g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Well then, Doc, as John F. Lemke sez;
We're all fricked !
HOOROO ☺
UNCLE WALLY ☺
PS READ THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE AND TELL ME WHAT U THINK !
=====0=====
I think world events are getting more ominous at this point...as they've
done numerous times before. Time will tell whether this period is
anything extraordinary beyond the crises of the past. My intuitive feeling
is that events are about to explode and propel us in a wholly radical
direction.
Docrodile
.
|
|
| | |
