| Topic: |
Science > Prophecies-Of-Nostradamus |
| User: |
"=?iso-8859-1?q?The_Last_2500_Days=99?=" |
| Date: |
13 Feb 2006 09:40:24 PM |
| Object: |
WORLD WAR III NEWS, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14TH, 2006 -- TARGET IRAN - PREPARATIONS BY ALL |
Middle East Realities www.middleeast.org
TARGET IRAN - PREPARATIONS BY ALL
MER - MiddleEast.Org - Washington - 13 February 2006: WAR these days is
far more than military attack. With the Americans there is first of all
a tremendous technological side involving high-tech spying, covert ops,
assassinations, internal upheavals, economic punishments, and regime
change attempts. In addition war preparations for the Americans in this
modern-day interconnected world involve massive propaganda campaigns
designed to manipulate public opinion; and this in turn includes
everything from planting information and stories to twisting
journalists and publications to 'report' in ways that suit the needs of
the war planners. Of course we were all witness to this kind of thing
in the build-up to the Iraq invasion/occupation -- most egregiously the
Judith Miller stories in the New York Times, Colin Powell's
unforgiveable hoax testimony before the U.N. Security Council, and the
false/misleading statements and speeches (including the State of the
Union address) by leading U.S. government officials. But all along the
real target was not weak Iraq which had been bombed, sanctioned, and
severely diminished over the past decade. The real target in the
modern-day Middle East has all along been Iran and those associated
forces including Syria, Lebanon (Hezbollah), and Occupied Palestine
(Hamas)...all pledged to stand up to American/Israeli/European
military, economic, and political hegemony and control of the vast
petro-rich region. This first article in today's Boston Globe helps
explain how the Iranians are preparing and how the planned U.S./Israeli
attack could spiral out of control, even into World War III. The
additional articles are examples of the hysteria raising commentaries
that are fanning the flames of Western fear from such publications as
TheBusinessOnline and The Washington Star.
Iran is prepared to retaliate, experts warn
By Bryan Bender
02/12/06 "Boston Globe" -- -- WASHINGTON -- Iran is prepared to launch
attacks using long-range missiles, secret commando units, and terrorist
allies planted around the globe in retaliation for any strike on the
country's nuclear facilities, according to new US intelligence
assessments and military specialists.
US and Israeli officials have not ruled out military action against
Iran if diplomacy fails to thwart its nuclear ambitions. Among the
options are airstrikes on suspected nuclear installations or covert
action to sabotage the Iranian program.
But military and intelligence analysts warn that Iran -- which a recent
US intelligence report described as ''more confident and assertive"
than it has been since the early days of the 1979 Islamic revolution --
could unleash reprisals across the region, and perhaps even inside the
United States, if the hard-line regime came under attack.
''When the Americans or Israelis are thinking about [military force], I
hope they will sit down and think about everything the ayatollahs could
do to make our lives miserable and what we will do to discourage them,"
said John Pike, director of the think tank GlobalSecurity.org,
referring to Iran's religious leaders.
''There could be a cycle of escalation."
President Bush has said military force should be the last resort in
international efforts to deter Iran from acquiring a nuclear bomb. Yet
Bush has stated unequivocally that the United States would not tolerate
an Iranian nuclear arsenal, which the CIA estimates could be in place
in three to 10 years. Iran maintains its nuclear program is solely
aimed at producing electricity, not weapons.
Israel, which Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has threatened
to annihilate, asserts that Tehran is much closer to going nuclear and
has been far more direct with its counter-threats.
The Israel Defense Forces, which destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor in
1981, has said it is perfecting ways to launch a preventative strike
against Iranian nuclear sites, including outfitting its Air Force with
American-made, bunker-busting munitions.
US intelligence officials have said that Iran, which fought a war with
Iraq from 1980-1988 that cost one million lives, still has the most
threatening armed forces in the immediate region. Its combined ground
forces are estimated at about 800,000 personnel. The CIA has concluded
that Iran is steadily enhancing its ability to project its military
power, including by threatening international shipping.
But it is Iran's unconventional weapons and tactics -- rather than its
conventional military -- that would pose the greatest threat, according
to the intelligence officials.
Bush's new intelligence chief, John D. Negroponte, outlining the
conclusions reached by a variety of US spy agencies, warned in his
first overall annual threat assessment this month to Congress that Iran
is capable of sparking a much wider conflict it comes under threat.
A major worry: newly acquired long-range missiles. Obtained with the
assistance of North Korea, the Shahab 3 could strike Israel and perhaps
even hit the periphery of Europe, according to a recent report by the
Pentagon's National Air and Space Intelligence Center.
The missiles could also be tipped with chemical warheads and threaten
US military bases in the region.
Iran is believed to have at least 20 launchers that are frequently
moved around the country to avoid detection.
''Iran has an extensive missile-development program and has received
support from entities in Russia, China, and North Korea," the Pentagon
report said, estimating their range to be at least 800 miles.
New missile designs under development could travel 400 miles farther,
it said, while Iran purchased at least a dozen X-55 cruise missiles
from Ukraine in 2001 that are capable of carrying a nuclear warhead as
far as Italy.
Meanwhile, Iranian agents and members of the Revolutionary Guard Corps,
widely believed to have a large presence in Iraq, could attempt to
foment an uprising by the their fellow Shi'ite majority in Iraq or join
insurgents in directly attacking US troops there, Negroponte warned.
He reported that Tehran has ''constrained" itself in Iraq because it is
generally satisfied with the political trends in favor of the Shi'ite
majority and to avoid giving the United States another excuse to attack
Iran. But that could change if Iran were targeted militarily.
A leading Shi'ite cleric in Iraq, Moqtada al-Sadr, whose militia has
clashed with US troops and rival Shi'ite groups, vowed in a visit to
Tehran last month to defend Iran if it were attacked.
The assessment presented by Negroponte said the Iranian regime already
provides ''guidance and training" to militant groups in Iraq and ''has
been responsible for at least some of the increasing lethality of
anticoalition attacks by providing Shia militants with the capability
to build" improvised explosive devices.
Government and private analysts assert that Iran's intelligence
apparatus and Revolutionary Guard Corps could cause serious damage to
US efforts to pacify Iraq.
''The Iranian ayatollahs may deploy an 'asymmetric' answer and incite a
Shi'ite rebellion in Iraq," the respected Russian military publication
''Defense and Security," warned last month, referring to a military
strategy that employs such tactics as guerrilla warfare. ''That would
be disastrous for the United States."
Iran, believed to be responsible for the bombing of a US Air Force
barracks in Saudi Arabia in 1996, also would be expected to enlist its
terrorist allies around the world to come to its aid if attacked, US
officials and private specialists contend.
''Tehran continues to support a number of terrorist groups, viewing
this capability as a critical regime safeguard by deterring US and
Israeli attacks, distracting and weakening Israel, and enhancing Iran's
regional influence through intimidation," according to Negroponte's
assessment to Congress.
Primary among them is Hezbollah, the Lebanese terrorist group that
killed 241 US Marines when it bombed a Beirut barracks in 1983.
''Lebanese Hezbollah is Iran's main terrorist ally, which . . . has a
worldwide support network and is capable of attacks against US
interests if it feels its Iranian patron is threatened," according to
the report.
''They have all kinds of people that would like to embrace martyrdom,"
Pike said of Iran, raising the specter that a terrorist group allied
with Iran would be capable of launching attacks inside the United
States to avenge a strike against Iran.
Intelligence officials also point out that Iran controls a small island
at the mouth the Strait of Hormuz and could use missiles and gunboats
to temporarily shut off access to the economically vital Persian Gulf,
sparking an oil crisis.
''Military attack is not the solution to this problem," Mohammad
Mohaddessin, chairman of the foreign affairs committee of the National
Council of Resistance of Iran, the leading dissident group, said in a
telephone interview from Paris. ''The regime is absolutely focusing on
nonconventional responses. Missiles and terrorist operations are the
strong points."
Iran makes its bid for regional hegemony
12 February 2006: The rise of Iran as the regional superpower of the
Middle East is the most significant (and most under-reported)
geopolitical development of the early 21st century. That part of the
world which contains most of the world's hydrocarbon energy is
increasingly falling under the shadow of an oil-rich, barbarically
fundamentalist, pro-terrorist, anti-Semitic and soon-to-be
nuclear-armed regime in Tehran, with potentially horrendous
consequences for the rest of the world. The influence of Iran now seeps
through the region in a poisonous crescent which stretches from Iran
into southern Iraq, on to Syria, then, through Hezbollah in Lebanon and
Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank, to the shores of the Mediterranean.
But its ability to intimidate goes far wider, spilling into Saudi
Arabia and along the southern shores of the Gulf.
Iran's rise has been facilitated by the removal of Iraq, the
traditional bulwark against Iranian expansion, after an Anglo-American
invasion which now looks like going down in history as an act of
supreme geopolitical folly. With Iraq sidelined (and increasingly under
Iranian control itself), Iran is now in a race with Saudi Arabia for
the leadership of Political Islam. It is already winning; but Tehran
believes victory will be guaranteed and its Islamic leadership made
impregnable when it has a nuclear arsenal to rattle. The rest of the
region is already cowering at the prospect, while the United States and
its allies look on, bereft of either the policies or the power to
thwart the inexorable rise of Iran. This is a story with no good news.
The theocracy which grips Iran is now prepared to say anything in its
bid to lead political Islam, from fanning the flames of Holocaust
denial to demanding the destruction of Israel. Its propaganda is
clearly inspired by Jospeh Gobbels, who pioneered the cult of the
"Big Lie" for the Nazis. For example, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei,
always wrongly described in the ignorant Western media as the
country's "moderate" Supreme Leader, last week claimed that the
publication of the now-notorious cartoons depicting the Prophet
Muhammad was an Israeli conspiracy motivated by anger over the victory
of Hamas in last month's Palestinian elections. Of course the
cartoons were first published in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten
on 30 September last year while the Iranian-funded terrorists of Hamas
won the Palestinian elections only last month; but propaganda has
always been a stranger to fact.
Mr Khamenei's absurd claim, which was curiously under-reported in the
West, was important for two reasons: it reaffirmed that the whole of
the Iranian regime - not just the newish President Ahmadinejad - is
deeply anti-Semitic in its pandering to Political Islam; and it
confirmed that anything to do with Islam - even the publishing of a
few unremarkable cartoons - will now be manipulated on a grand scale
to gain advantage for the hearts and minds of Political Islam. The
international row over the cartoons is a classic case study of this
phenomenon. It is now clear that the global Islamic outrage over the
cartoons was far from the spontaneous outburst originally depicted by a
duped Western media: it has been fanned and fuelled by Islamic
extremists for there own ends. It is significant that no demonstrations
greeted their original publication in Denmark last September; nor when,
remarkably, even an Egyptian newspaper, Al Fager, reprinted them on its
front page on 17 October. But a delegation of hardline Danish Muslim
leaders was soon touring the Middle East to drum up support for a
"spontaneous" protest.
To spice their case, they took along, in addition to the original 12
cartoons, three other cartoons that had never been published in the
West. These cartoons, of course, were hugely more offensive to Islam
than the published ones; as they were passed around the Islamic world,
they were accompanied by malicious rumours of further Western outrages
against Islam, such as burnings of the Koran, none of them true. But
truth is a fragile flower in an Islamic world in which lies are spread
daily by e-mail and text to populations that have been brainwashed for
years by extremist clerics and hateful state-controlled media.
Tehran, for a change, was initially slow to see the potential for
mischief in the cartoons. The Saudis and the Syrians were quicker to
pump up the outrage (Damascus even played host to the world's great
oxymoron, the "spontaneous Syrian demonstration"). But Iran soon
caught up: hence the claim that the cartoons were all an Israeli
conspiracy. This weekend President Ahmadinejad, echoing his Supreme
Leader, was accusing European countries of being Israeli puppets for
publishing them. They had become a weapon in the war for the leadership
of Political Islam.
But the cartoons are a sideshow for Iran. The real thrust of policy is
to exploit the power vacuum in the Gulf following the invasion of Iraq,
from which Iran is now emerging as the clear victor. The demise of Iraq
and its subsequent slipping into the Iranian sphere of influence,
coupled with Iran's nuclear ambitions, is producing a fundamental
shift of the balance of power in the Middle East which is leading to
Iran's ascendancy. On present trends, as Iraq comes under its wing
and it begins to amass a nuclear arsenal, Iran is heading to be the
uncontested hegemon of the Gulf region as well as the undisputed
champion of Political Islam. For the world's most active state
sponsor and paymaster of terrorism to emerge as the nuclear-armed
regional superpower would be a stunning double victory for Tehran, made
all the more delicious for the mullahs because it could not have
happened without the unwitting complicity of the United States and its
British ally. That Iran is now in the ascendancy is a result of their
terrible miscalculation. Strong government in Baghdad has long been the
major stumbling block to Iranian expansionism in the region, which is
why America and Great Britain rightly backed the odious Saddam during
the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s (just as America and Britain backed
the even more odious Stalin in the war against Hitler). But replacing
Saddam with chaos has removed Iraq as the traditional counterweight;
worse than that, it has allowed Iran to infiltrate and undermine its
old enemy.
Police and local militias controlled by Tehran effectively run the
South of Iraq while Iranian-backed terrorist groups are responsible for
the murder of scores of innocent Iraqis every week. The British troops
supposedly in charge of the South are now merely garrisoned there. The
already growing influence of Iran, a Shia Muslim country, has been
further boosted by Iraq's elections, which returned a Shia majority
with a mandate to create an Islamic Republic, a far cry from Saddam's
secularism, which favoured the Sunni minority. All this is the
consequence of the invasion, which a former leading Republican in the
US State Department last week described to our sister publication, The
Spectator, as "the single biggest strategic blunder in modern US
foreign policy". This newspaper turned against the invasion of Iraq
when it became clear we had been misled by London and Washington about
the existence of weapons of mass destruction and because it soon became
apparent that, disgracefully, the invaders had no credible plan to
rebuild the country. But, with hindsight, it is now clear that the
fundamental reason the war was wrong is because it changed the regional
balance of power overwhelmingly in Iran's favour.
The invasion of Iraq has unleashed a hostile regional superpower which
the West is now unable (or unwilling) to contain. In Iraq, Iranian
agents are backing the anti-American Shia cleric, Muqtada al-Sadr,
whose supporters grabbed 30 seats in the new parliament and who openly
supports Iran. The Iranian aim is to position Mr al-Sadr to take over
from the moderate Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who is suffering from
heart trouble, and swing the Shia behind Iran. As Iraq succumbs to
becoming an Iranian protectorate, Tehran is also reinforcing its
position across the Middle East.
Last month President Ahmadinejad went to Damascus to meet Syrian
President Bashar al-Assad. The two have worked closely together to
support Hezbollah; but Iranian influence has never been stronger in
Damascus than it is today, now that the Syrian president is in need of
a like-minded, oil-rich friend. The small, oil-rich Gulf states need
nothing from Iran but they fear its rise because of its size and power;
and they would inevitably kowtow to a nuclear-armed Tehran, especially
since all the Sunni-ruled Gulf states have sizeable Shia populations
which Iran could turn against them. Iran's potential ascendancy over
the entire region is clearly within its grasp. With Iraq neutralized
and America mired in Iraq, Saudi Arabia is the sole remaining bulwark
to Iranian expansion; it is clearly not up to the task. The Saudis
still compete with Iran for the leadership of Political Islam. But it
is a competition they are losing; they are terrified at the prospect of
a nuclear-armed Iran (the Saudis are even rumoured to be considering
purchasing nuclear weapons from Pakistan when Iran goes nuclear); and
they are apprehensive at the mischief Tehran could cause among the Shia
population that just happens to be a majority in the Saudis' eastern
oil fields.
The normally reticent Saudis are already speaking aloud about their
concerns. Muhammad Abdullah al-Zulfa, a member of the Shura Council of
Saudi Arabia, warned last weekend that "as a Gulf area, we don't
want to see Iran as the major power in the area. And we don't want to
see Iran having this nuclear weapon, where it will be a major threat to
the stability of the Gulf area and even to the Arab world
altogether." King Abdullah II of Jordan has been even more outspoken,
warning that a Shia-led Iraq would develop a special relationship with
Iran, Syria, Lebanon and Lebanese Hezbollah (and now also Hamas-run
Palestine) to create a "crescent . . . that will be very
destabilising for the Gulf countries and for the whole region".
These are warnings that much of the Western media and foreign-policy
establishment seem determined to ignore, perhaps because Western
leaders feel increasingly powerless to affect events in the Middle
East. But the West's failure to contain a nuclear-armed and oil-rich
Iran, led by fundamentalist mullahs anxious to spread their creed
throughout the region, is a geopolitical disaster in the making.
The European Union, as usual, has neither the power nor the inclination
to act; it is more likely to accommodate the rise of Iran. But
Washington and London are also paralysed by the aftermath of their
strategic blunder in Iraq. Those in the Middle East who want to counter
the emergence of Iran as the regional superpower look like they will be
left to their own devices; and those in the West who claim the War on
Terror is being won will have to think again.
http://www.thebusinessonline.com/Stories.aspx?Iran%20makes%20its%20bid%20for%20regional%20hegemony&
StoryID=B71841AE-0E76-4836-B83B-EE6E0D3D25FF&SectionID=803597D7-4BD5-45D5-BF88-E1AC85BF7FDF
Cartoon war or global intifada?
By Arnaud de Borchgrave
Published February 11, 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The combustible cartoon war quickly became shorthand for what radical
Muslim clerics had been planning for months -- a clash of
civilizations. The offending Danish cartoons, first published almost
five months ago, were mild compared to how some cartoonists in Western
democracies slash and singe organized religion.
One late-night comedian did a skit of a TV news anchor announcing Moses
had just come down with the Ten Commandments. "And now to Sam Donaldson
in the foothills of Mount Sinai to report on the three most important
ones."
As for Prophet Muhammad wearing a smoking, turban-mounted bomb, Osama
bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahri, and their Islamist terrorist fan club
the world over, invoke and hail his name five times daily as their
leader in their war against the "crusader infidels." That's us
Judeo-Christians
The countless millions of Muslims in some 50 Muslim countries who tell
pollsters bin Laden is more trustworthy than President Bush are deeply
religious. They scoff at the widely held notion in the U.S. that a tiny
minority of terrorists has hijacked Islam.
These same Muslim faithful approve of Islamist terrorist leaders who
promise brainwashed volunteer suicide bombers the reward offered by the
prophet -- the keys to paradise and 72 virgins to keep them busy for a
while, if not eternity. The Danish cartoonist elicited a few chuckles
with his drawing of tattered suicide bombers, bits of clothing still
smoking, greeted at the Muslim pearly gates by a frantic gatekeeper
waving them away and shouting -- "Get lost, we've run out of virgins."
More seriously, the "spontaneous" protests and riots that ricochet
throughout the Muslim world from Iraq to Indonesia and on to Denmark
and Norway, peaceful countries that give a wide berth to international
rumbles, were carefully prepared over several months. Following
publication of the cartoons in a Danish newspaper last September, a
group of fundamentalist clerics flew to the Middle East to arouse
indignation and anger among other radical imams and mullahs in both
Sunni Islam and Shi'ite Islam, from Cairo's al-Azhar University,
Islam's oldest, to the holy cities of Najaf in Iraq and Qum in Iran.
The delegation of Danish Muslim clerics was led by Ahmed Abu-Laban, a
fundamentalist Palestinian preacher expelled by the United Arab
Emirates for his vitriolic Friday sermons. They got a hearing with Arab
League chief Amr Moussa at his headquarters in Cairo and persuaded him
to move the issue onto the agenda of a December meeting of several Arab
heads of state. Next came a fatwa, or religious edict, from Cairo's
senior Muslim cleric. The fatwa became a signal for global demos.
Meanwhile, back in Denmark, Flemming Rose, cultural editor of the
newspaper Jyllands-Posten that published the cartoons critical of
Islam, which included the forbidden face of the prophet, was warned by
a counterterrorism informant there was now a "halal" decree against
him. Islam had sanctioned a contract on his life.. Mr. Rose now moves
only with bodyguards.
When Iran's firebrand President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says the Holocaust
never happened and Israel should be made to disappear from the map,
there are just as many millions of Sunnis as there are Shi'ites who nod
their heads in agreement. So all it requires is a match to light the
fuse of Islamofascism, much as Adolf Hitler's Brownshirts in the 1930s
got an eager populace to demonstrate against Jews -- and ransack their
stores. The moderate Muslim majority was again spooked, as it doubtless
will be again when another fatwa emanates from Iran authorizing the use
of a nuclear weapon against Israel.
The cartoon war could be seen as a limbering exercise for a global
intifada. It would be a miracle if the Wahhabi and Salafi and Deobandi
and Shi'ite clergy leaders didn't see it that way.
Iran's Mr. Ahmadinejad, surveying the global cartoon thunderclaps, must
have concluded the return of the 12th Imam, known as the Mahdi, is
drawing nearer, which means world chaos, death and destruction, before
a new era of world peace under Islamic rule.
Arnaud de Borchgrave is editor at large for United Press International
and for The Washington Times.
More Evidence Nuking Iran is on Schedule
Kurt Nimmo Blog - Sunday February 12th 2006, 3:38 am: In a story
appearing in the Sunday Telegraph, the newspaper once owned by the
Canadian criminal finagler and neocon "Lord" Conrad Black, amoral
strategists "at the Pentagon are drawing up plans for devastating
bombing raids backed by submarine-launched ballistic missile attacks
against Iran's nuclear sites as a 'last resort' to block
Teheran's efforts to develop an atomic bomb." If not so deadly
serious, the idea that the Straussian neocons will shock and awe Iran
only as a "last resort" would be comical. In fact, they have long
planned to bomb Iran-imaginary nukes or not-and kill as many
Iranians as possible and decimate the civilian infrastructure, as they
have done in Iraq (some estimates put the death toll thus far above
130,000). "Central Command and Strategic Command planners are
identifying targets, assessing weapon-loads and working on logistics
for an operation, the Sunday Telegraph has learnt."
In fact, the Pentagon has long mapped out its targets, including
"secondary targets," usually civilian airports, radio and TV
installations, telecommunications centers, government buildings,
conventional power plants, water and waste treatment plants, highways
and bridges, and rail lines. In Iraq (twice) this sort of
"targeting" resulted in massive suffering and death (coupled with
sanctions after the first Bush Iraq Invasion, more than a million
Iraqis died of starvation and disease, a stunning crime against
humanity).
These criminal strategists, basically no different than the German
Wehrmacht strategists who planned Operation Barbarossa, "are
reporting to the office of Donald Rumsfeld, the defense secretary, as
America updates plans for action if the diplomatic offensive fails to
thwart the Islamic republic's nuclear bomb ambitions." Of course,
this "diplomatic offensive" is designed to fail, as the
"diplomatic offensive" prior to the Iraqi invasion failed (and the
"diplomatic offensive" in Afghanistan failed, even though the
Taliban were ready to turn over Osama bin Laden, if only the Americans
were able to provide evidence of his complicity in nine eleven,
something the Americans were unable and unwilling to do because they
did not have compelling evidence and, besides, they had planned to
invade Afghanistan well before nine eleven, as plenty of evidence
attests).
"This is more than just the standard military contingency
assessment," a senior Pentagon adviser told the Telegraph. "This
has taken on much greater urgency in recent months."
Indeed, the shock and awe dismemberment of Iranian society is
considered more "than just the standard military contingency
assessment," as the PNAC Straussian neocons have long told us. It has
"taken on much greater urgency in recent months" because the Bush
administration, a front for the Straussian neocon nihilists, is winding
down and it will take months to obliterate Iranian culture and civil
society. Moreover, the neocons need to fit in Syria, at minimum-they
would prefer to do Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, but this is
obviously too ambitious, that is unless they can figure out a way to
keep Bush in office.
"The prospect of military action could put Washington at odds with
Britain which fears that an attack would spark violence across the
Middle East, reprisals in the West and may not cripple Teheran's
nuclear program. But the steady flow of disclosures about Iran's
secret nuclear operations and the virulent anti-Israeli threats of
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has prompted the fresh assessment of
military options by Washington. The most likely strategy would involve
aerial bombardment by long-distance B2 bombers, each armed with up to
40,000lb of precision weapons, including the latest bunker-busting
devices. They would fly from bases in Missouri with mid-air
refuelling."
Nonsense, Tony Blair is fully onboard with the plan to reduce the
Middle East to a simmering cauldron of violence and dead, mutilated
bodies. Bush, Rumsfeld, Rice, et al, are ecstatic over Ahmadinejad's
highly suspect anti-Semitic (or rather, anti-Ashkenazi, since the
majority of Jews in Israel are white Europeans and not Semites)
declarations, leading more than a few people to believe he is a Mossad
agent or has an as of yet unknown reason for egging on the Israelis and
Americans. Either way, Ahmadinejad is courting disaster.
As former CIA intelligence analyst Philip Giraldi told the American
Conservative last July, the United States plans to nuke the be-jesus
out of Iran. "The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice
President ***** Cheney's office, has tasked the United States
Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be
employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the
United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran
employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons." All of
this despite the fact Iran is a non-nuclear country, a signatory to the
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and working with the IAEA, although
the latter reported Iran to the UN Security Council last week. So itchy
is the Pentagon to use nukes against non-nuke countries, they wrote the
"policy" in their "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations" (pdf
doc).
"Senator Joe Lieberman, a Democrat, [said] Mr. Bush is expected to be
faced by the decision [to criminally bomb Iran] within two years."
More balderdash-the United States plans to bomb Iran next month, or
soon thereafter. It wants Iran wasted sooner before later. Last week
Vladimir Zhirinovsky, leader of the Liberal Democrats in Russia, told
the Ekho Moskvy radio station "that the Muslim [cartoon] riots were
orchestrated by the US to garner European backing for the military
strike" and the "war is inevitable because the Americans want this
war. Any country claiming a leading position in the world will need to
wage wars. Otherwise it will simply not be able to retain its leading
position," as well spelled out by the PNAC maniacs who have captured
the flag in Washington.
Mid-East Realities www.middleeast.org
Source: http://www.middleeast.org/articles/2006/2/1347.htm
============================================
.
|
|
| User: "Wayne" |
|
| Title: Re: WORLD WAR III NEWS, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14TH, 2006 -- TARGET IRAN- PREPARATIONS BY ALL |
14 Feb 2006 01:21:52 AM |
|
|
<snip>
*yawn* Stop choking the chicken, you will go blind if you don't.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "=?iso-8859-1?q?The_Last_2500_Days=99?=" |
|
| Title: Re: WORLD WAR III NEWS, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14TH, 2006 -- TARGET IRAN - PREPARATIONS BY ALL |
15 Feb 2006 08:58:55 PM |
|
|
Middle East Realities www.middleeast.org
TARGET IRAN - PREPARATIONS BY ALL
MER - MiddleEast.Org - Washington - 13 February 2006: WAR these days is
far more than military attack. With the Americans there is first of all
a tremendous technological side involving high-tech spying, covert ops,
assassinations, internal upheavals, economic punishments, and regime
change attempts. In addition war preparations for the Americans in this
modern-day interconnected world involve massive propaganda campaigns
designed to manipulate public opinion; and this in turn includes
everything from planting information and stories to twisting
journalists and publications to 'report' in ways that suit the needs of
the war planners. Of course we were all witness to this kind of thing
in the build-up to the Iraq invasion/occupation -- most egregiously the
Judith Miller stories in the New York Times, Colin Powell's
unforgiveable hoax testimony before the U.N. Security Council, and the
false/misleading statements and speeches (including the State of the
Union address) by leading U.S. government officials. But all along the
real target was not weak Iraq which had been bombed, sanctioned, and
severely diminished over the past decade. The real target in the
modern-day Middle East has all along been Iran and those associated
forces including Syria, Lebanon (Hezbollah), and Occupied Palestine
(Hamas)...all pledged to stand up to American/Israeli/European
military, economic, and political hegemony and control of the vast
petro-rich region. This first article in today's Boston Globe helps
explain how the Iranians are preparing and how the planned U.S./Israeli
attack could spiral out of control, even into World War III. The
additional articles are examples of the hysteria raising commentaries
that are fanning the flames of Western fear from such publications as
TheBusinessOnline and The Washington Star.
Iran is prepared to retaliate, experts warn
By Bryan Bender
02/12/06 "Boston Globe" -- -- WASHINGTON -- Iran is prepared to launch
attacks using long-range missiles, secret commando units, and terrorist
allies planted around the globe in retaliation for any strike on the
country's nuclear facilities, according to new US intelligence
assessments and military specialists.
US and Israeli officials have not ruled out military action against
Iran if diplomacy fails to thwart its nuclear ambitions. Among the
options are airstrikes on suspected nuclear installations or covert
action to sabotage the Iranian program.
But military and intelligence analysts warn that Iran -- which a recent
US intelligence report described as ''more confident and assertive"
than it has been since the early days of the 1979 Islamic revolution --
could unleash reprisals across the region, and perhaps even inside the
United States, if the hard-line regime came under attack.
''When the Americans or Israelis are thinking about [military force], I
hope they will sit down and think about everything the ayatollahs could
do to make our lives miserable and what we will do to discourage them,"
said John Pike, director of the think tank GlobalSecurity.org,
referring to Iran's religious leaders.
''There could be a cycle of escalation."
President Bush has said military force should be the last resort in
international efforts to deter Iran from acquiring a nuclear bomb. Yet
Bush has stated unequivocally that the United States would not tolerate
an Iranian nuclear arsenal, which the CIA estimates could be in place
in three to 10 years. Iran maintains its nuclear program is solely
aimed at producing electricity, not weapons.
Israel, which Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has threatened
to annihilate, asserts that Tehran is much closer to going nuclear and
has been far more direct with its counter-threats.
The Israel Defense Forces, which destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor in
1981, has said it is perfecting ways to launch a preventative strike
against Iranian nuclear sites, including outfitting its Air Force with
American-made, bunker-busting munitions.
US intelligence officials have said that Iran, which fought a war with
Iraq from 1980-1988 that cost one million lives, still has the most
threatening armed forces in the immediate region. Its combined ground
forces are estimated at about 800,000 personnel. The CIA has concluded
that Iran is steadily enhancing its ability to project its military
power, including by threatening international shipping.
But it is Iran's unconventional weapons and tactics -- rather than its
conventional military -- that would pose the greatest threat, according
to the intelligence officials.
Bush's new intelligence chief, John D. Negroponte, outlining the
conclusions reached by a variety of US spy agencies, warned in his
first overall annual threat assessment this month to Congress that Iran
is capable of sparking a much wider conflict it comes under threat.
A major worry: newly acquired long-range missiles. Obtained with the
assistance of North Korea, the Shahab 3 could strike Israel and perhaps
even hit the periphery of Europe, according to a recent report by the
Pentagon's National Air and Space Intelligence Center.
The missiles could also be tipped with chemical warheads and threaten
US military bases in the region.
Iran is believed to have at least 20 launchers that are frequently
moved around the country to avoid detection.
''Iran has an extensive missile-development program and has received
support from entities in Russia, China, and North Korea," the Pentagon
report said, estimating their range to be at least 800 miles.
New missile designs under development could travel 400 miles farther,
it said, while Iran purchased at least a dozen X-55 cruise missiles
from Ukraine in 2001 that are capable of carrying a nuclear warhead as
far as Italy.
Meanwhile, Iranian agents and members of the Revolutionary Guard Corps,
widely believed to have a large presence in Iraq, could attempt to
foment an uprising by the their fellow Shi'ite majority in Iraq or join
insurgents in directly attacking US troops there, Negroponte warned.
He reported that Tehran has ''constrained" itself in Iraq because it is
generally satisfied with the political trends in favor of the Shi'ite
majority and to avoid giving the United States another excuse to attack
Iran. But that could change if Iran were targeted militarily.
A leading Shi'ite cleric in Iraq, Moqtada al-Sadr, whose militia has
clashed with US troops and rival Shi'ite groups, vowed in a visit to
Tehran last month to defend Iran if it were attacked.
The assessment presented by Negroponte said the Iranian regime already
provides ''guidance and training" to militant groups in Iraq and ''has
been responsible for at least some of the increasing lethality of
anticoalition attacks by providing Shia militants with the capability
to build" improvised explosive devices.
Government and private analysts assert that Iran's intelligence
apparatus and Revolutionary Guard Corps could cause serious damage to
US efforts to pacify Iraq.
''The Iranian ayatollahs may deploy an 'asymmetric' answer and incite a
Shi'ite rebellion in Iraq," the respected Russian military publication
''Defense and Security," warned last month, referring to a military
strategy that employs such tactics as guerrilla warfare. ''That would
be disastrous for the United States."
Iran, believed to be responsible for the bombing of a US Air Force
barracks in Saudi Arabia in 1996, also would be expected to enlist its
terrorist allies around the world to come to its aid if attacked, US
officials and private specialists contend.
''Tehran continues to support a number of terrorist groups, viewing
this capability as a critical regime safeguard by deterring US and
Israeli attacks, distracting and weakening Israel, and enhancing Iran's
regional influence through intimidation," according to Negroponte's
assessment to Congress.
Primary among them is Hezbollah, the Lebanese terrorist group that
killed 241 US Marines when it bombed a Beirut barracks in 1983.
''Lebanese Hezbollah is Iran's main terrorist ally, which . . . has a
worldwide support network and is capable of attacks against US
interests if it feels its Iranian patron is threatened," according to
the report.
''They have all kinds of people that would like to embrace martyrdom,"
Pike said of Iran, raising the specter that a terrorist group allied
with Iran would be capable of launching attacks inside the United
States to avenge a strike against Iran.
Intelligence officials also point out that Iran controls a small island
at the mouth the Strait of Hormuz and could use missiles and gunboats
to temporarily shut off access to the economically vital Persian Gulf,
sparking an oil crisis.
''Military attack is not the solution to this problem," Mohammad
Mohaddessin, chairman of the foreign affairs committee of the National
Council of Resistance of Iran, the leading dissident group, said in a
telephone interview from Paris. ''The regime is absolutely focusing on
nonconventional responses. Missiles and terrorist operations are the
strong points."
Iran makes its bid for regional hegemony
12 February 2006: The rise of Iran as the regional superpower of the
Middle East is the most significant (and most under-reported)
geopolitical development of the early 21st century. That part of the
world which contains most of the world's hydrocarbon energy is
increasingly falling under the shadow of an oil-rich, barbarically
fundamentalist, pro-terrorist, anti-Semitic and soon-to-be
nuclear-armed regime in Tehran, with potentially horrendous
consequences for the rest of the world. The influence of Iran now seeps
through the region in a poisonous crescent which stretches from Iran
into southern Iraq, on to Syria, then, through Hezbollah in Lebanon and
Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank, to the shores of the Mediterranean.
But its ability to intimidate goes far wider, spilling into Saudi
Arabia and along the southern shores of the Gulf.
Iran's rise has been facilitated by the removal of Iraq, the
traditional bulwark against Iranian expansion, after an Anglo-American
invasion which now looks like going down in history as an act of
supreme geopolitical folly. With Iraq sidelined (and increasingly under
Iranian control itself), Iran is now in a race with Saudi Arabia for
the leadership of Political Islam. It is already winning; but Tehran
believes victory will be guaranteed and its Islamic leadership made
impregnable when it has a nuclear arsenal to rattle. The rest of the
region is already cowering at the prospect, while the United States and
its allies look on, bereft of either the policies or the power to
thwart the inexorable rise of Iran. This is a story with no good news.
The theocracy which grips Iran is now prepared to say anything in its
bid to lead political Islam, from fanning the flames of Holocaust
denial to demanding the destruction of Israel. Its propaganda is
clearly inspired by Jospeh Gobbels, who pioneered the cult of the
"Big Lie" for the Nazis. For example, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei,
always wrongly described in the ignorant Western media as the
country's "moderate" Supreme Leader, last week claimed that the
publication of the now-notorious cartoons depicting the Prophet
Muhammad was an Israeli conspiracy motivated by anger over the victory
of Hamas in last month's Palestinian elections. Of course the
cartoons were first published in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten
on 30 September last year while the Iranian-funded terrorists of Hamas
won the Palestinian elections only last month; but propaganda has
always been a stranger to fact.
Mr Khamenei's absurd claim, which was curiously under-reported in the
West, was important for two reasons: it reaffirmed that the whole of
the Iranian regime - not just the newish President Ahmadinejad - is
deeply anti-Semitic in its pandering to Political Islam; and it
confirmed that anything to do with Islam - even the publishing of a
few unremarkable cartoons - will now be manipulated on a grand scale
to gain advantage for the hearts and minds of Political Islam. The
international row over the cartoons is a classic case study of this
phenomenon. It is now clear that the global Islamic outrage over the
cartoons was far from the spontaneous outburst originally depicted by a
duped Western media: it has been fanned and fuelled by Islamic
extremists for there own ends. It is significant that no demonstrations
greeted their original publication in Denmark last September; nor when,
remarkably, even an Egyptian newspaper, Al Fager, reprinted them on its
front page on 17 October. But a delegation of hardline Danish Muslim
leaders was soon touring the Middle East to drum up support for a
"spontaneous" protest.
To spice their case, they took along, in addition to the original 12
cartoons, three other cartoons that had never been published in the
West. These cartoons, of course, were hugely more offensive to Islam
than the published ones; as they were passed around the Islamic world,
they were accompanied by malicious rumours of further Western outrages
against Islam, such as burnings of the Koran, none of them true. But
truth is a fragile flower in an Islamic world in which lies are spread
daily by e-mail and text to populations that have been brainwashed for
years by extremist clerics and hateful state-controlled media.
Tehran, for a change, was initially slow to see the potential for
mischief in the cartoons. The Saudis and the Syrians were quicker to
pump up the outrage (Damascus even played host to the world's great
oxymoron, the "spontaneous Syrian demonstration"). But Iran soon
caught up: hence the claim that the cartoons were all an Israeli
conspiracy. This weekend President Ahmadinejad, echoing his Supreme
Leader, was accusing European countries of being Israeli puppets for
publishing them. They had become a weapon in the war for the leadership
of Political Islam.
But the cartoons are a sideshow for Iran. The real thrust of policy is
to exploit the power vacuum in the Gulf following the invasion of Iraq,
from which Iran is now emerging as the clear victor. The demise of Iraq
and its subsequent slipping into the Iranian sphere of influence,
coupled with Iran's nuclear ambitions, is producing a fundamental
shift of the balance of power in the Middle East which is leading to
Iran's ascendancy. On present trends, as Iraq comes under its wing
and it begins to amass a nuclear arsenal, Iran is heading to be the
uncontested hegemon of the Gulf region as well as the undisputed
champion of Political Islam. For the world's most active state
sponsor and paymaster of terrorism to emerge as the nuclear-armed
regional superpower would be a stunning double victory for Tehran, made
all the more delicious for the mullahs because it could not have
happened without the unwitting complicity of the United States and its
British ally. That Iran is now in the ascendancy is a result of their
terrible miscalculation. Strong government in Baghdad has long been the
major stumbling block to Iranian expansionism in the region, which is
why America and Great Britain rightly backed the odious Saddam during
the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s (just as America and Britain backed
the even more odious Stalin in the war against Hitler). But replacing
Saddam with chaos has removed Iraq as the traditional counterweight;
worse than that, it has allowed Iran to infiltrate and undermine its
old enemy.
Police and local militias controlled by Tehran effectively run the
South of Iraq while Iranian-backed terrorist groups are responsible for
the murder of scores of innocent Iraqis every week. The British troops
supposedly in charge of the South are now merely garrisoned there. The
already growing influence of Iran, a Shia Muslim country, has been
further boosted by Iraq's elections, which returned a Shia majority
with a mandate to create an Islamic Republic, a far cry from Saddam's
secularism, which favoured the Sunni minority. All this is the
consequence of the invasion, which a former leading Republican in the
US State Department last week described to our sister publication, The
Spectator, as "the single biggest strategic blunder in modern US
foreign policy". This newspaper turned against the invasion of Iraq
when it became clear we had been misled by London and Washington about
the existence of weapons of mass destruction and because it soon became
apparent that, disgracefully, the invaders had no credible plan to
rebuild the country. But, with hindsight, it is now clear that the
fundamental reason the war was wrong is because it changed the regional
balance of power overwhelmingly in Iran's favour.
The invasion of Iraq has unleashed a hostile regional superpower which
the West is now unable (or unwilling) to contain. In Iraq, Iranian
agents are backing the anti-American Shia cleric, Muqtada al-Sadr,
whose supporters grabbed 30 seats in the new parliament and who openly
supports Iran. The Iranian aim is to position Mr al-Sadr to take over
from the moderate Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who is suffering from
heart trouble, and swing the Shia behind Iran. As Iraq succumbs to
becoming an Iranian protectorate, Tehran is also reinforcing its
position across the Middle East.
Last month President Ahmadinejad went to Damascus to meet Syrian
President Bashar al-Assad. The two have worked closely together to
support Hezbollah; but Iranian influence has never been stronger in
Damascus than it is today, now that the Syrian president is in need of
a like-minded, oil-rich friend. The small, oil-rich Gulf states need
nothing from Iran but they fear its rise because of its size and power;
and they would inevitably kowtow to a nuclear-armed Tehran, especially
since all the Sunni-ruled Gulf states have sizeable Shia populations
which Iran could turn against them. Iran's potential ascendancy over
the entire region is clearly within its grasp. With Iraq neutralized
and America mired in Iraq, Saudi Arabia is the sole remaining bulwark
to Iranian expansion; it is clearly not up to the task. The Saudis
still compete with Iran for the leadership of Political Islam. But it
is a competition they are losing; they are terrified at the prospect of
a nuclear-armed Iran (the Saudis are even rumoured to be considering
purchasing nuclear weapons from Pakistan when Iran goes nuclear); and
they are apprehensive at the mischief Tehran could cause among the Shia
population that just happens to be a majority in the Saudis' eastern
oil fields.
The normally reticent Saudis are already speaking aloud about their
concerns. Muhammad Abdullah al-Zulfa, a member of the Shura Council of
Saudi Arabia, warned last weekend that "as a Gulf area, we don't
want to see Iran as the major power in the area. And we don't want to
see Iran having this nuclear weapon, where it will be a major threat to
the stability of the Gulf area and even to the Arab world
altogether." King Abdullah II of Jordan has been even more outspoken,
warning that a Shia-led Iraq would develop a special relationship with
Iran, Syria, Lebanon and Lebanese Hezbollah (and now also Hamas-run
Palestine) to create a "crescent . . . that will be very
destabilising for the Gulf countries and for the whole region".
These are warnings that much of the Western media and foreign-policy
establishment seem determined to ignore, perhaps because Western
leaders feel increasingly powerless to affect events in the Middle
East. But the West's failure to contain a nuclear-armed and oil-rich
Iran, led by fundamentalist mullahs anxious to spread their creed
throughout the region, is a geopolitical disaster in the making.
The European Union, as usual, has neither the power nor the inclination
to act; it is more likely to accommodate the rise of Iran. But
Washington and London are also paralysed by the aftermath of their
strategic blunder in Iraq. Those in the Middle East who want to counter
the emergence of Iran as the regional superpower look like they will be
left to their own devices; and those in the West who claim the War on
Terror is being won will have to think again.
http://www.thebusinessonline.com/Stories.aspx?Iran%20makes%20its%20bi...
Cartoon war or global intifada?
By Arnaud de Borchgrave
Published February 11, 2006
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
=AD-----
The combustible cartoon war quickly became shorthand for what radical
Muslim clerics had been planning for months -- a clash of
civilizations. The offending Danish cartoons, first published almost
five months ago, were mild compared to how some cartoonists in Western
democracies slash and singe organized religion.
One late-night comedian did a skit of a TV news anchor announcing Moses
had just come down with the Ten Commandments. "And now to Sam Donaldson
in the foothills of Mount Sinai to report on the three most important
ones."
As for Prophet Muhammad wearing a smoking, turban-mounted bomb, Osama
bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahri, and their Islamist terrorist fan club
the world over, invoke and hail his name five times daily as their
leader in their war against the "crusader infidels." That's us
Judeo-Christians
The countless millions of Muslims in some 50 Muslim countries who tell
pollsters bin Laden is more trustworthy than President Bush are deeply
religious. They scoff at the widely held notion in the U.S. that a tiny
minority of terrorists has hijacked Islam.
These same Muslim faithful approve of Islamist terrorist leaders who
promise brainwashed volunteer suicide bombers the reward offered by the
prophet -- the keys to paradise and 72 virgins to keep them busy for a
while, if not eternity. The Danish cartoonist elicited a few chuckles
with his drawing of tattered suicide bombers, bits of clothing still
smoking, greeted at the Muslim pearly gates by a frantic gatekeeper
waving them away and shouting -- "Get lost, we've run out of virgins."
More seriously, the "spontaneous" protests and riots that ricochet
throughout the Muslim world from Iraq to Indonesia and on to Denmark
and Norway, peaceful countries that give a wide berth to international
rumbles, were carefully prepared over several months. Following
publication of the cartoons in a Danish newspaper last September, a
group of fundamentalist clerics flew to the Middle East to arouse
indignation and anger among other radical imams and mullahs in both
Sunni Islam and Shi'ite Islam, from Cairo's al-Azhar University,
Islam's oldest, to the holy cities of Najaf in Iraq and Qum in Iran.
The delegation of Danish Muslim clerics was led by Ahmed Abu-Laban, a
fundamentalist Palestinian preacher expelled by the United Arab
Emirates for his vitriolic Friday sermons. They got a hearing with Arab
League chief Amr Moussa at his headquarters in Cairo and persuaded him
to move the issue onto the agenda of a December meeting of several Arab
heads of state. Next came a fatwa, or religious edict, from Cairo's
senior Muslim cleric. The fatwa became a signal for global demos.
Meanwhile, back in Denmark, Flemming Rose, cultural editor of the
newspaper Jyllands-Posten that published the cartoons critical of
Islam, which included the forbidden face of the prophet, was warned by
a counterterrorism informant there was now a "halal" decree against
him. Islam had sanctioned a contract on his life.. Mr. Rose now moves
only with bodyguards.
When Iran's firebrand President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says the Holocaust
never happened and Israel should be made to disappear from the map,
there are just as many millions of Sunnis as there are Shi'ites who nod
their heads in agreement. So all it requires is a match to light the
fuse of Islamofascism, much as Adolf Hitler's Brownshirts in the 1930s
got an eager populace to demonstrate against Jews -- and ransack their
stores. The moderate Muslim majority was again spooked, as it doubtless
will be again when another fatwa emanates from Iran authorizing the use
of a nuclear weapon against Israel.
The cartoon war could be seen as a limbering exercise for a global
intifada. It would be a miracle if the Wahhabi and Salafi and Deobandi
and Shi'ite clergy leaders didn't see it that way.
Iran's Mr. Ahmadinejad, surveying the global cartoon thunderclaps, must
have concluded the return of the 12th Imam, known as the Mahdi, is
drawing nearer, which means world chaos, death and destruction, before
a new era of world peace under Islamic rule.
Arnaud de Borchgrave is editor at large for United Press International
and for The Washington Times.
More Evidence Nuking Iran is on Schedule
Kurt Nimmo Blog - Sunday February 12th 2006, 3:38 am: In a story
appearing in the Sunday Telegraph, the newspaper once owned by the
Canadian criminal finagler and neocon "Lord" Conrad Black, amoral
strategists "at the Pentagon are drawing up plans for devastating
bombing raids backed by submarine-launched ballistic missile attacks
against Iran's nuclear sites as a 'last resort' to block
Teheran's efforts to develop an atomic bomb." If not so deadly
serious, the idea that the Straussian neocons will shock and awe Iran
only as a "last resort" would be comical. In fact, they have long
planned to bomb Iran-imaginary nukes or not-and kill as many
Iranians as possible and decimate the civilian infrastructure, as they
have done in Iraq (some estimates put the death toll thus far above
130,000). "Central Command and Strategic Command planners are
identifying targets, assessing weapon-loads and working on logistics
for an operation, the Sunday Telegraph has learnt."
In fact, the Pentagon has long mapped out its targets, including
"secondary targets," usually civilian airports, radio and TV
installations, telecommunications centers, government buildings,
conventional power plants, water and waste treatment plants, highways
and bridges, and rail lines. In Iraq (twice) this sort of
"targeting" resulted in massive suffering and death (coupled with
sanctions after the first Bush Iraq Invasion, more than a million
Iraqis died of starvation and disease, a stunning crime against
humanity).
These criminal strategists, basically no different than the German
Wehrmacht strategists who planned Operation Barbarossa, "are
reporting to the office of Donald Rumsfeld, the defense secretary, as
America updates plans for action if the diplomatic offensive fails to
thwart the Islamic republic's nuclear bomb ambitions." Of course,
this "diplomatic offensive" is designed to fail, as the
"diplomatic offensive" prior to the Iraqi invasion failed (and the
"diplomatic offensive" in Afghanistan failed, even though the
Taliban were ready to turn over Osama bin Laden, if only the Americans
were able to provide evidence of his complicity in nine eleven,
something the Americans were unable and unwilling to do because they
did not have compelling evidence and, besides, they had planned to
invade Afghanistan well before nine eleven, as plenty of evidence
attests).
"This is more than just the standard military contingency
assessment," a senior Pentagon adviser told the Telegraph. "This
has taken on much greater urgency in recent months."
Indeed, the shock and awe dismemberment of Iranian society is
considered more "than just the standard military contingency
assessment," as the PNAC Straussian neocons have long told us. It has
"taken on much greater urgency in recent months" because the Bush
administration, a front for the Straussian neocon nihilists, is winding
down and it will take months to obliterate Iranian culture and civil
society. Moreover, the neocons need to fit in Syria, at minimum-they
would prefer to do Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, but this is
obviously too ambitious, that is unless they can figure out a way to
keep Bush in office.
"The prospect of military action could put Washington at odds with
Britain which fears that an attack would spark violence across the
Middle East, reprisals in the West and may not cripple Teheran's
nuclear program. But the steady flow of disclosures about Iran's
secret nuclear operations and the virulent anti-Israeli threats of
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has prompted the fresh assessment of
military options by Washington. The most likely strategy would involve
aerial bombardment by long-distance B2 bombers, each armed with up to
40,000lb of precision weapons, including the latest bunker-busting
devices. They would fly from bases in Missouri with mid-air
refuelling."
Nonsense, Tony Blair is fully onboard with the plan to reduce the
Middle East to a simmering cauldron of violence and dead, mutilated
bodies. Bush, Rumsfeld, Rice, et al, are ecstatic over Ahmadinejad's
highly suspect anti-Semitic (or rather, anti-Ashkenazi, since the
majority of Jews in Israel are white Europeans and not Semites)
declarations, leading more than a few people to believe he is a Mossad
agent or has an as of yet unknown reason for egging on the Israelis and
Americans. Either way, Ahmadinejad is courting disaster.
As former CIA intelligence analyst Philip Giraldi told the American
Conservative last July, the United States plans to nuke the be-jesus
out of Iran. "The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice
President ***** Cheney's office, has tasked the United States
Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be
employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the
United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran
employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons." All of
this despite the fact Iran is a non-nuclear country, a signatory to the
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and working with the IAEA, although
the latter reported Iran to the UN Security Council last week. So itchy
is the Pentagon to use nukes against non-nuke countries, they wrote the
"policy" in their "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations" (pdf
doc).
"Senator Joe Lieberman, a Democrat, [said] Mr. Bush is expected to be
faced by the decision [to criminally bomb Iran] within two years."
More balderdash-the United States plans to bomb Iran next month, or
soon thereafter. It wants Iran wasted sooner before later. Last week
Vladimir Zhirinovsky, leader of the Liberal Democrats in Russia, told
the Ekho Moskvy radio station "that the Muslim [cartoon] riots were
orchestrated by the US to garner European backing for the military
strike" and the "war is inevitable because the Americans want this
war. Any country claiming a leading position in the world will need to
wage wars. Otherwise it will simply not be able to retain its leading
position," as well spelled out by the PNAC maniacs who have captured
the flag in Washington.
Mid-East Realities www.middleeast.org
Source: http://www.middleeast.org/articles/2006/2/1347.htm
=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
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
End of the worl 2006
A shower of dark matter asteroids will destroy Earth on May 1st, 2006 !
March 2006
A Grab-bag of Truly Wondrous Prophecies gleaned from the WWW for 2006...............
2006 - Earthquake prediction
Harvesting Predictions For 2006
Fallout predictions for 2006
Ragnarok in 2006
| WORLD WAR III NEWS, SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 12TH, 2006 AD
For Those Looking for A Road Map for 2006
Re: Halloween 2006 - Paranormal Investigators `~
Re: VOTE! Usenet Kook Awards, February 2006: the Greatest Kook: Honest John or Terry Allison of Montres Allison
World War III News, Monday, April 6th, 2006 AD.......Bolton: World must confront Iran
WORLD WAR III NEWS, SUNDAY, MARCH 12th, 2006 AD....Iran threatens to use oil as weapon
World War III News, Sunday, April 2nd, 2006 AD.......
|
|
|
