Coming War With Iran - All Iran News Here

[Boubear]

The Kurdish autonomous region in Iraq is basically an independent country now, the central government hardly controls Northern Iraq. This has inspired the Kurds in the surrounding country, who have always wanted an independent state to start fighting again. Violence surged because of this in Turkey, this is why the Turkish invaded. The Iranian state press is reporting that the Kurdish groups in Iraq are now being used by the US against Iran: http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=61486&sectionid=351020101 Other reports have already shown how the US is using all ethnic minorities in Iran against the central government: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1543798/US-funds-terror-groups-to-sow-chaos-in-Iran.html
The end goal seems to be to create an independent Kurdish state, because they want to change the way the entire region looks. They also want to create an independent Baluchi state, which is one of the reasons they're funding Jundullah, and they want to break up Saudi Arabia. But right now the US treats the Kurdish people as canon fodder against Iran.

Thank you for your explanation.  

It's interesting how so little people understand the end goal, they think it's all about WMD, but it's about transforming the ME.  I've tried telling this to people on different forums, but they are just blind to what the US and EU are really up too!!

[Boubear]

The US will put itself in harms way and then claim to be the victim, much easier to get the people to follow.

I wonder if they knew that Iran was going to be doing war games and testing missles, and this is why their fleet is so dangerously close.  Maybe they are hoping one the missles will hit them!!

[scary]

TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iran has test fired nine missiles in response to what it says are threats from Israel and the United States, according to state-run Iranian media and a U.S. military source.


The new version of the Shahab-3 missile is capable of reaching its main regional enemy Israel, Iran says.

 The Islamic Republic News Agency and Press TV reported that the naval forces of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Wednesday test-fired a Shahab-3 missile during war games in the Persian Gulf.

The exercise comes a month after Israel conducted a military drill in the eastern Mediterranean involving dozens of warplanes, and the latest Iranian activities prompted concern from Israel and condemnation from the United States.

Iran occasionally tests missiles, but this firing comes amid international tensions over its nuclear aspirations.

"The war game was aimed at improving the combat readiness of Iran's armed forces. The 2,000-kilometers-range Shahab-3 missiles were tested to demonstrate Iran's capability in hitting its enemies accurately at the early stages of their probable attacks against the Islamic Republic.  Watch footage of the missiles being fired »

"Domestic and foreign political and military analysts believe that Shahab-3 is able to reach targets in the occupied lands in case of the Zionist regime's probable attacks against Iran's nuclear sites," the Islamic Republic News Agency said.

Iran's Press TV said the military "successfully test-fired new long and mid-range missiles." It mentioned the Shahab 3, "which can hit any target within a range of 2,000km." It said the missile was equipped with a one-ton conventional warhead.

"Nine highly advanced missiles with improved accuracy were simultaneously tested including the Zelzal and Fateh missiles with ranges of 400km and 170km respectively."

Press TV said troops were also involved in the maneuvers in the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz areas.

A U.S. military official with knowledge of the testing counted the firing of seven missiles, one Shahab-3 and six shorter-range ballistic missiles. The testing took place over land, the official said.

The official, who noted that these kinds of tests had occurred before and were not unexpected, said the tests were tracked by U.S. intelligence.

World powers, who suspect Iran is intent on building nuclear weapons, have offered economic and other incentives in exchange for the suspension of its enrichment program.

.

There are worldwide worries that Israel, which is concerned by Irans plans, is pondering a unilateral strike.

Israel's recent aerial military exercise was in part an effort to send a message that it has the capability to attack Iran's nuclear program.

The distance involved in the exercise was roughly the same as would be involved in a possible strike on the Iranian nuclear fuel plant at Natanz, a U.S. military official said.

In 1981, Israel attacked a nuclear facility in Iraq. Israel also struck a site in Syria that some say was a nuclear reactor under construction.

One Israeli Cabinet member, Shaul Mofaz, recently said it "will attack" Iran if the nuclear program was not halted.

Last week, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander, Gen. Mohammed Ali-Jaafari, said any strike against Iran's nuclear facilities would be regarded a the beginning of war.

At the same time, Iranian leaders are discounting the possibility of war. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in Malaysia this week for a conference, told reporters Iran was trying to prevent a confrontation.

"We are making all-out efforts to expand peace and security in the world. You should not be concerned about a new war," he said on Tuesday.

Mark Regev, spokesman for Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, said it did not want conflict with Iran.

"But the Iranian nuclear program and the Iranian ballistic missile program must be of concern for the entire International community," Regev said.

The White House reacted strongly to the Iranian test-firing.

"Iran's development of ballistic missiles is a violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions and completely inconsistent with Iran's obligations to the world," said National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe.

Johndroe mentioned that the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany "are committed to a diplomatic path, and have offered Iran a generous package of incentives if they will suspend their uranium enrichment activities."

"They should also refrain from further missile tests if they truly seek to gain the trust of the world. The Iranians should stop the development of ballistic missiles, which could be used as a delivery vehicle for a potential nuclear weapon, immediately."

U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the Republican presidential candidate, said the tests "demonstrate again the dangers it [Iran] poses to its neighbors and to the wider region, especially Israel."

"Ballistic missile testing coupled with Iran's continued refusal to cease its nuclear activities should unite the international community in efforts to counter Iran's dangerous ambitions."

McCain supports working with Europe and regional allies to deal with Iran, not "unilateral concessions."


Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said he would handle the situation with talks and sanctions.

"Iran is a grave threat. We have to make sure that we are working with our allies to apply tightening pressure economically on Iran at the same time as we start engaging in the kind of direct diplomacy that can lead them to standing down on issues like nuclear weapons."


http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/09/iran.missiles/index.html

[Boubear]

((This is interesting considering that Iran is testing missles))

Meteor seen passing over Israel

Citizens residing in north, central Israel report seeing object travel from east to west at great speed; some say it made shrieking sound 'like a missile'

Ynet
Published:    07.08.08, 23:30 / Israel News

A meteor was seen passing over Israel Tuesday night in many parts of the country. Ynet was flooded with calls from citizens residing in central Israel, the Sharon region, Jerusalem and the Krayot cities who reported seeing the object crossing the sky at approximately 8:15 pm. Some witnesses said they heard a shrieking sound.

 
Eyewitness Ranik Kortzman said, "I was in my balcony when I suddenly saw an object with two trails passing over Kfar Saba from east to
west. It was travelling at great velocity and made a shrieking sound – like a missile."

 
Ram Raphaeli of Kfar Yedidya in the Sharon told Ynet "we were on the roof when my son turned my attention to a tiny object that was passing above us. It appeared to be a meteor with a trail. It was traveling horizontally at a relatively low altitude. We didn't hear any noise, but it flew by at great speed."

 

Yigal Pat-El, chairman of the Israeli Astronomical Association and the director of the observatory in Giv'atayim told Ynet that "meteors enter the earth's atmosphere all the time. This is not a rare occurrence.

 

"The reason we were able to observe this meteor is because it was relatively large. Most meteors don't weigh more than 1/1000 gram, and this one apparently weighed a few grams," he said. 

Link

[Switters]

This seems to all be coming to a head.  This morning I woke up to see Iran is flexing their military muscles by firing off test missiles.  Russia is now “distressed” over the situation.  In the last few weeks we’ve had various threats and posturing by military and government officials from the U.S. and Iran warning each other.  Iran saying that it the U.S. and their allies ships in the gulf would be the first target in a counter strike.  You have the U.S. warning that if Iran continues with their Nuclear arsenal development there will a heavy cost to pay.

This is a goddamn déjà vu.  The SAME exact reasons were given for invading Irag and yet there were NO WMD’s found.  Are we going to fall for these lies again?

Bush has said that he would like to see this resolved diplomatically but that “all options are on the table”.  What the hell?  I really don’t see any evidence of us trying to resolve this diplomatically.  Multi-lateral discussions seem to have made some progress with North Korea, they are dismantling nuclear facilities already.

This could all be resolved diplomatically….but we all know that is NOT part of the plan.  What a damn shame…

I’m guessing within the next 60 days, we’ll be looking at a very large escalation event.  And this could well likely turn into WWIII. 

[scary]

CNN front page story. Headline


TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iran test-fired a long-range missile on Wednesday in response to what it says are threats from Israel and the United States, Iranian officials said.


The new version of the Shahab-3 missile is capable of reaching its main regional enemy Israel, Iran says.

 Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps test-fired a Shahab-3 missile and several other missiles during war games in the Persian Gulf called the Great Prophet III, according to Iran's state-run media and a U.S. military source.

"We want to tell the world that those who conduct their foreign policy by using the language of threat against Iran have to know that our finger is always on the trigger and we have hundreds and even thousands of missiles ready to be fired against predetermined targets," Gen. Hossein Salami, commander of the Revolutionary Guard ground forces, said on state TV.

"We will chase the enemies on the ground and in the sky and we are able react strongly to enemy's threats in shortest possible time."

William Burns, a senior U.S. State Department official, said Iran is "as serious ... a problem as any we face today."

The exercise comes a month after Israel conducted a military drill in the eastern Mediterranean involving dozens of warplanes, and the latest Iranian activities prompted concern from Israel and condemnation from the United States.

Iran occasionally tests missiles, but this firing comes amid international tensions over its nuclear aspirations.

The state-run Islamic Republic News Agency said "the war game was aimed at improving the combat readiness of Iran's armed forces. The 2,000-kilometers-range Shahab-3 missiles were tested to demonstrate Iran's capability in hitting its enemies accurately at the early stages of their probable attacks against the Islamic Republic."  Watch footage of the missiles being fired »

The agency added: "Domestic and foreign political and military analysts believe that Shahab-3 is able to reach targets in the occupied lands in case of the Zionist regime's probable attacks against Iran's nuclear sites."

Iran's Press TV said the military "successfully test-fired new long and mid-range missiles." It mentioned the Shahab 3, "which can hit any target within a range of 2,000km." It said the missile was equipped with a one-ton conventional warhead.

"Nine highly advanced missiles with improved accuracy were simultaneously tested including the Zelzal and Fateh missiles with ranges of 400km and 170km respectively."

Press TV said troops were also involved in the maneuvers in the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz areas.

A U.S. military official with knowledge of the testing counted the firing of seven missiles, one Shahab-3 and six shorter-range ballistic missiles. The testing took place over land, the official said.

The official, who noted that these kinds of tests had occurred before and were not unexpected, said the tests were tracked by U.S. intelligence.

Another military source said another Iranian exercise is under way inside the Persian Gulf with surface ships and submarines.

World powers, who suspect Iran is intent on building nuclear weapons, have offered economic and other incentives in exchange for the suspension of its enrichment program.


There are worldwide worries that Israel, which is concerned by Iran's plans, is pondering a unilateral strike.

Israel's recent aerial military exercise was in part an effort to send a message that it has the capability to attack Iran's nuclear program.

The distance involved in the exercise was roughly the same as would be involved in a possible strike on the Iranian nuclear fuel plant at Natanz, a U.S. military official said.

In 1981, Israel attacked a nuclear facility in Iraq. Israel also struck a site in Syria that some say was a nuclear reactor under construction.

One Israeli Cabinet member, Shaul Mofaz, recently said it "will attack" Iran if the nuclear program was not halted.

Last week, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander, Gen. Mohammed Ali-Jaafari, said any strike against Iran's nuclear facilities would be regarded a the beginning of war.

At the same time, Iranian leaders are discounting the possibility of war. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in Malaysia this week for a conference, told reporters Iran was trying to prevent a confrontation.

"We are making all-out efforts to expand peace and security in the world. You should not be concerned about a new war," he said on Tuesday.

Mark Regev, spokesman for Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, said it did not want conflict with Iran.

"But the Iranian nuclear program and the Iranian ballistic missile program must be of concern for the entire International community," Regev said.

The White House reacted strongly to the Iranian test-firing.

National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe said: "Iran's development of ballistic missiles is a violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions and completely inconsistent with Iran's obligations to the world."

Johndroe mentioned that the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany "are committed to a diplomatic path, and have offered Iran a generous package of incentives if they will suspend their uranium enrichment activities."

"They should also refrain from further missile tests if they truly seek to gain the trust of the world. The Iranians should stop the development of ballistic missiles, which could be used as a delivery vehicle for a potential nuclear weapon, immediately."


U.S. Sen. John McCain, the Republican presidential candidate, said the tests "demonstrate again the dangers it [Iran] poses to its neighbors and to the wider region, especially Israel."

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama said:"Iran is a grave threat. We have to make sure that we are working with our allies to apply tightening pressure economically on Iran at the same time as we start engaging in the kind of direct diplomacy that can lead them to standing down on issues like nuclear weapons

*Original Story*
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/09/iran.missiles/index.html

[Godfather77]

Iran missile test 'provocative'
Wednesday, 9 July 2008 16:33 UK
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7498214.stm

The US and Israel have condemned Iran after it test-fired a series of missiles, including one capable of reaching Israel.

Iran state media said the Shahab-3 had a range of 2,000km (1,240 miles) and was armed with a conventional warhead.

Iran has tested the missile before, but the latest launch comes amid rising tensions with the US and Israel over the country's nuclear programme.

US Under-secretary of State William Burns called the tests "provocative".

Following the the early morning tests at a remote desert site - which sent oil prices climbing - he told a Congressional hearing "the US and international community remain committed to meeting the challenges posed by Iran".

In the Israeli parliament, Housing Minister Ze'ev Boim said: "I suggest Israel will not talk, and Israel should prepare itself to do what is needed to do."
 
Two other types of missile with shorter ranges were also fired as part of the Great Prophet III war games being staged by Iran's military.



Brig Gen Hoseyn Salami, commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guards' air force, said: "Our missiles are ready for shooting at any place and any time, quickly and with accuracy.

"The enemy must not repeat its mistakes. The enemy targets are under surveillance."

The tests are intended to deter any Israeli or US strike against Tehran's nuclear installations, says BBC diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus.

Our correspondent - who is in Israel - says the country has a fully operational anti-ballistic missile system, which Israeli military experts believe can counter any Iranian threat.  But there is no room for complacency, he adds.

On Monday, an adviser to Iran's Supreme Leader said it would retaliate against any military attack by hitting the Israeli city of Tel Aviv. Other commanders have threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz, through which a large part of the world's oil flows, and to target the US and its allies around the world if Iran comes under attack.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the test justified Washington's plan to base a missile shield plan in Eastern Europe - which is strongly opposed by Russia.

'Joke'

Her point was backed by the Republican US presidential candidate, John McCain. His Democratic rival, Barack Obama, told ABC's Good Morning America Iran was "a great threat".

The French, German and Italian governments also expressed concern at the missile tests. But Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has insisted his country had no intention of attacking Israel.

Speaking on a visit to Malaysia on Tuesday, Mr Ahmadinejad said Iran did not fear an attack by the US or Israel over its nuclear activities, dismissing the possibility as a "joke".

Western leaders have been attempting to convince Tehran to stop enriching uranium, which it has continued despite the imposition of sanctions by the UN and the European Union.

Iran insists its nuclear research is for a civilian energy programme.

[bigron]

Iran Gen.: Our finger is always on the trigger !


Story Highlights :

Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards test fire long and medium range missiles

NEW: Iranian general: "Our finger is always on the trigger"

NEW: U.S.: Iran is "as serious... a problem as any we face today

Missile tests were part of Iranians war games in the Persian Gulf



TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iran test-fired a long-range missile on Wednesday in response to what it says are threats from Israel and the United States, Iranian officials said.

"We want to tell the world that those who conduct their foreign policy by using the language of threat against Iran have to know that our finger is always on the trigger and we have hundreds and even thousands of missiles ready to be fired against predetermined targets," Gen. Hossein Salami, commander of the Revolutionary Guard ground forces, said on state TV.

"We will chase the enemies on the ground and in the sky and we are able react strongly to enemy's threats in shortest possible time."

Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps test-fired a Shahab-3 missile and several other missiles during war games in the Persian Gulf called the Great Prophet III, according to Iran's state-run media and a U.S. military source.

William Burns, a senior U.S. State Department official, said Iran is "as serious ... a problem as any we face today."

The exercise comes a month after Israel conducted a military drill in the eastern Mediterranean involving dozens of warplanes, and the latest Iranian activities prompted concern from Israel and condemnation from the United States.

Iran occasionally tests missiles, but this firing comes amid international tensions over its nuclear aspirations.

The state-run Islamic Republic News Agency said "the war game was aimed at improving the combat readiness of Iran's armed forces. The 2,000-kilometers-range Shahab-3 missiles were tested to demonstrate Iran's capability in hitting its enemies accurately at the early stages of their probable attacks against the Islamic Republic." Watch footage of the missiles being fired »

The agency added: "Domestic and foreign political and military analysts believe that Shahab-3 is able to reach targets in the occupied lands in case of the Zionist regime's probable attacks against Iran's nuclear sites."

Iran's Press TV said the military "successfully test-fired new long and mid-range missiles." It mentioned the Shahab 3, "which can hit any target within a range of 2,000km." It said the missile was equipped with a one-ton conventional warhead.

"Nine highly advanced missiles with improved accuracy were simultaneously tested including the Zelzal and Fateh missiles with ranges of 400km and 170km respectively."

Press TV said troops were also involved in the maneuvers in the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz areas.

A U.S. military official with knowledge of the testing counted the firing of seven missiles, one Shahab-3 and six shorter-range ballistic missiles. The testing took place over land, the official said.

The official, who noted that these kinds of tests had occurred before and were not unexpected, said the tests were tracked by U.S. intelligence.

Another military source said another Iranian exercise is under way inside the Persian Gulf with surface ships and submarines.

World powers, who suspect Iran is intent on building nuclear weapons, have offered economic and other incentives in exchange for the suspension of its enrichment program.

Iran, which says its nuclear program is strictly to produce energy, defends its right to proceed with enrichment.

There are worldwide worries that Israel, which is concerned by Iran's plans, is pondering a unilateral strike.

Israel's recent aerial military exercise was in part an effort to send a message that it has the capability to attack Iran's nuclear program.

The distance involved in the exercise was roughly the same as would be involved in a possible strike on the Iranian nuclear fuel plant at Natanz, a U.S. military official said.

In 1981, Israel attacked a nuclear facility in Iraq. Israel also struck a site in Syria that some say was a nuclear reactor under construction.

One Israeli Cabinet member, Shaul Mofaz, recently said it "will attack" Iran if the nuclear program was not halted.

Last week, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander, Gen. Mohammed Ali-Jaafari, said any strike against Iran's nuclear facilities would be regarded a the beginning of war.

At the same time, Iranian leaders are discounting the possibility of war. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in Malaysia this week for a conference, told reporters Iran was trying to prevent a confrontation.

"We are making all-out efforts to expand peace and security in the world. You should not be concerned about a new war," he said on Tuesday.

Mark Regev, spokesman for Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, said it did not want conflict with Iran.

"But the Iranian nuclear program and the Iranian ballistic missile program must be of concern for the entire International community," Regev said.

The White House reacted strongly to the Iranian test-firing.

U.S. National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe said: "Iran's development of ballistic missiles is a violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions and completely inconsistent with Iran's obligations to the world."

Johndroe mentioned that the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany "are committed to a diplomatic path, and have offered Iran a generous package of incentives if they will suspend their uranium enrichment activities."

"They should also refrain from further missile tests if they truly seek to gain the trust of the world. The Iranians should stop the development of ballistic missiles, which could be used as a delivery vehicle for a potential nuclear weapon, immediately."

CNN's Barbara Starr and Elaine Quijano contributed to this report.

 
Links referenced within this article

Watch footage of the missiles being fired »
#cnnSTCVideo
Iran
http://topics.edition.cnn.com/topics/Iran
Iran
http://topics.edition.cnn.com/topics/Iran
Israel
http://topics.edition.cnn.com/topics/Israel
Nuclear Energy
http://topics.edition.cnn.com/topics/Nuclear_Energy
European Union
http://topics.edition.cnn.com/topics/European_Union

 

 
Find this article at:
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/09/iran.missiles/index.html 

[mytee726]

If you watch the CNN news all they are talking about is Iran
Folks I fear we are just days away from War with Iran and then god help us all.
Iran tested some missiles today and The US Gov is making a big deal about it. The Def dept. says that they are the biggest problem our country faces today. ( Sound Familiar )

[KingNeil]

They've been talking about Iran for months. But yes, we definitely will be having a war with them.

[chris jones]

The military are on the brink of a coop. Generals who disagre with GW are forcefully retired.
An indication, that there is unrest on the inside. This blockade is illegal, actualy an act of war.
Russia and China are not pleased with the USA actions, and I beleive the military is painfully aware of this.

My point, the high uppers, are not all moronic robots subject to the distatorship in place. I assume the those who took their oath to defend us against both foreign and DOMEsTIC enemys are well aware of who is the true enemy &  they are sincerley pissed off.

[GoodBush]

The military are on the brink of a coop. Generals who disagre with GW are forcefully retired.
An indication, that there is unrest on the inside. This blockade is illegal, actualy an act of war.
Russia and China are not pleased with the USA actions, and I beleive the military is painfully aware of this.

My point, the high uppers, are not all moronic robots subject to the distatorship in place. I assume the those who took their oath to defend us against both foreign and DOMEsTIC enemys are well aware of who is the true enemy &  they are sincerley pissed off.

Great point and I hope those that swore on the constitution to defend our country, STAND UP NOW! Take action, follow Dennis Kucinich and remove the criminals from office.

[bigron]

chatter on the MSM  as well as blogosphere is definitely there  !!!

[mytee726]

I do to, but they will need to know they have our total support or they may not make a move. Some how we need to get the word to them we will be there with them. Just as long as they are willing to give the country back to Americans and not decide to run it themselves. Which is what Alex has been afraid of that we would give up one cult for another. I am also afraid of this.

[xTruthSeekerx]

ezikiels war is about to begin

[Real Truth]

Great point and I hope those that swore on the constitution to defend our country, STAND UP NOW! Take action, follow Dennis Kucinich and remove the criminals from office.

"our" country don't you mean the pope's:(

if we attack iran that will be the last straw for me

[Overcast]

"At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it? Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never! All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years. At what point, then, is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide. The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume I, "Address Before the Young Men's Lyceum of Springfield, Illinois (January 27, 1838), p. 109.

[Switters]

I'd have to agree, all the signs are there.  Both sides are posturing and making threats...although it seems that Iran's are defensive in nature.  They know it's coming and are hoping this latest showing of military might (missile testing) will dissuage the attack a little longer.

We have general's stating that the military is already stretched to it's limit and that it would be horrible timing to start with Iran.  And then I also heard another General state today that we could likely have most of our troops out of Iraq within a year.  But the underlying truth there is that they will most likely just be moved back to Afghanistan (which is escalating again quite a bit) or over to Iran.

If this blockade bill goes through, that will surely start the war.

I say within the next 60 days.  Bush and Cheney's last hoorah.

What pisses me off is that they are unwilling to talk things through with Iran, yet Bush says he'd rather have this situation resolved diplomatically.

I just can't believe that the public is falling for the same bullshit that was fed to us when we invaded Iraq.  There is NO proof that Iran has Nuclear Weapons.

The irony is that we are the ones that supplied them their first nuclear reactor...

[thadividedsky]

Lets remember that the vote on HR 362 (the blockade bill) could come this week, so we could be at war with Iran when we weake up for work on monday. I tell everyone around me about this and they say "it'll never happen. they're just flexing muscles.". Most are still in that little box and Im wondering what has to happen to wake everyone up. If we go to war with Iran, our economy is gone. The world economy will probably be toast as well. Plus Russia, Iran and China have a mutual protection pact where if any of the 3 are attacked, the other 2 come to their aid and retaliate. I read that the natanz facitily is far enough underground where only a small yield tacticle nuke could take it out. If that's true, then bush will probably just use a nuke and kick this off. I swear I must be living a nightmare right now. LONG LIVE THE REPUBLIC. The answer to nineteen eightyfour, is 1776.

[Nailer]

Here is a page I found while searching info about the weapons Iran has stockpiled. here is also a probable scenario of how it will go down. lower on the page is missle info .

http://judicial-inc.biz/Sunburn_Missile.htm



After Watching Destruction of Iraq, The Iranians Will Be Forced To Respond
 

Because Iran is already at total war footing, the attacks will escalate out of control in a matter of days.

Israel hits Iran's nuclear facilities

Iran goes to Alert One

Israel hits a US Carrier and blames Iran

US hits Iran's navy in northern Persian Gulf

Iran attacks with all it's missiles

Iran has already calculated their response, and they realize their only option is a massive attack. Iran is sitting on a stockpile of Exocet, Sunburn 22 and SS-NX-26 Yakhonts missiles. The Fifth Fleet sits at Qatar, and it is within range of the Sunburn-22 and Yakhonts. Iran is said to have commercial freighters equipped with Exocets that will be in port at the time. Once Israel hits the US carrier (similar to the USS Liberty) then Iran will have no choice but to defend itself.
 

The 5th Fleet sits in a lake surrounded by Iran's rugged mountains, and will be decimated by the missiles. The US fleet will arrive in the Indian Ocean, but will be helpless because the straits of Hormuz will be showered by a Phalanx of hundreds of Exocets.

 

[Nailer]

http://judicial-inc.biz/Sunburn_Missile.htm

Straits Of Hormuz

The occupiers will become the besieged The US will be cornered - if they try to escape, they will be slaughtered in the Straits of Hormuz. With Iran's enormous missile capability, the US will have two choices - either go to the UN for peace, or escalate to an all-out nuclear attack on Iran.
 

 

Flow Of Oil Stops

With enough anti-ship missiles, the Iranians can halt tanker traffic through Hormuz for weeks, even months. With the flow of oil from the Gulf curtailed, the price of a barrel of crude will skyrocket on the world market. Within days, the global economy will begin to grind to a halt.

[scary]

CNN.com Headline



(CNN) -- Iran test-fired more missiles overnight, Iranian news media reported Thursday, one day after it tested a long-range Shahab-3 and other missiles in the Persian Gulf region.


Iranian media say Thursday's test-fire of missiles was a continuation of exercises that began Wednesday, above.

 The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has said that the missiles involved were medium and long-range.

The Iranian news agency Fars said the launches, near the Persian Gulf, were a continuation of Wednesday's maneuvers and that the missiles hit their targets successfully.

The test came only hours after U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the United States is determined to prevent Iran from threatening its interests or those of its allies.

At a news conference in the Georgian capital of Tblisi, Rice said the United States has been working with allies to "make certain that they are capable of defending themselves" against any threat from Iran.

"We take very strongly our obligation to help our allies defend themselves and no one should be confused about that," Rice said.

 
She said a missile defense shield the United States hopes to create in Eastern Europe would be another way to head off any threat from Iran.

"These are all elements of America's intention and determination to prevent Iran from threatening our interests or the interests of our friends and allies, and I don't think the Iranians are too confused, either, about the capability and the power of the United States to do exactly that," she said.

The forces of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps had test-fired a Shahab-3 missile and several others during war games in the Persian Gulf, an Iranian commander said Wednesday.

The Shahab-3 has a range of about 2,000 km, putting all of Israel, Turkey, Pakistan and the Arabian peninsula within striking distance. From Iran the missile's reach extends from southern Russia to the Horn of Africa, from south-eastern Europe to Nepal.  See where Iran's missiles could strike »

The Iranian exercises came a month after Israel conducted a military drill in the eastern Mediterranean involving dozens of warplanes and aerial tanks.

Iran and Israel have been engaged in an escalating war of words: Iran has accused Israel of trying to destabilize the republic, while Israel has not ruled out military action to halt Iran's nuclear aspirations.

Iran's missile tests prompted condemnation from the United States and Israel. It is believed the longer-range Shahab-4 missile, when finished, would have the capability to hit parts of Europe, a U.S. intelligence official said.

Rice encouraged Iran to "get on the right side of the international community" by accepting a package of incentives put forward by China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States -- the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council -- as well as Germany.

Iran "ought to be talking about that, not about threats against America or threats against America's allies because frankly it's not going to do them any good."

Meanwhile Israel was due Thursday to display an advanced aircraft that is capable of spying on Iran. Israel's Army Radio told CNN that the Eitam airplane is a "practical answer" to recent Iranian "threats."

But Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) -- which manufactures aircraft for both military and civilian use -- said the plane exhibit is not connected to Israel's recent "tensions" with Iran.


Rather, the airplane is being shown near Ben Gurion International Airport, southeast of Tel Aviv, because it will be at the prestigious Farnborough International Air Show in southern England next week, an IAI spokeswoman said.

The plane, a Gulfstream G550 business jet that has been modified with sophisticated intelligence-gathering systems, was unveiled last year and is already part of the Israeli Air Force's fleet


Original Story

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/10/us.iran/index.html

[bigron]

posted 2008-07-09 15:30:36

Tomgram:
Why Cheney Won't Take Down Iran

Reality Bites Back

Why the U.S. Won't Attack Iran

By Tom Engelhardt

It's been on the minds of antiwar activists and war critics since 2003. And little wonder. If you don't remember the pre-invasion of Iraq neocon quip, "Everyone wants to go to Baghdad. Real men want to go to Tehran..." -- then take notice. Even before American troops entered Iraq, knocking off Iran was already "Regime Change: The Sequel." It was always on the Bush agenda and, for a faction of the administration led by Vice President Cheney, it evidently still is.

Add to that a series of provocative statements by President Bush, the Vice President, and other top U.S. officials and former officials. Take Cheney's daughter Elizabeth, who recently sent this verbal message to the Iranians: "[D]espite what you may be hearing from Congress, despite what you may be hearing from others in the administration who might be saying force isn't on the table... we're serious." Asked about an Israeli strike on Iran, she said: "I certainly don't think that we should do anything but support them." Similarly, former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton suggested that the Bush administration might launch an Iranian air assault in its last, post-election weeks in office.

Consider as well the evident relish with which the President and other top administration officials regularly refuse to take "all options" off that proverbial "table" (at which no one bothers to sit down to talk). Throw into the mix semi-official threats, warnings, and hair-raising leaks from Israeli officials and intelligence types about Iran's progress in producing a nuclear weapon and what Israel might do about it. Then there were those recent reports on a "major" Israeli "military exercise" in the Mediterranean that seemed to prefigure a future air assault on Iran. ("Several American officials said the Israeli exercise appeared to be an effort to develop the military's capacity to carry out long-range strikes and to demonstrate the seriousness with which Israel views Iran's nuclear program.")

From the other side of the American political aisle comes a language hardly less hair-raising, including Hillary Clinton's infamous comment about how the U.S. could "totally obliterate" Iran (in response to a hypothetical Iranian nuclear attack on Israel). Congressman Ron Paul recently reported that fellow representatives "have openly voiced support for a pre-emptive nuclear strike" on Iran, while the resolution soon to come before the House (H.J. Res. 362), supported by Democrats as well as Republicans, urges the imposition of the kind of sanctions and a naval blockade on Iran that would be tantamount to a declaration of war.

Stir in a string of new military bases the U.S. has been building within miles of the Iranian border, the repeated crescendos of U.S. military charges about Iranian-supplied weapons killing American soldiers in Iraq, and the revelation by Seymour Hersh, our premier investigative reporter, that, late last year, the Bush administration launched -- with the support of the Democratic leadership in Congress -- a $400 million covert program "designed to destabilize [Iran's] religious leadership," including cross-border activities by U.S. Special Operations Forces and a low-level war of terror through surrogates in regions where Baluchi and Ahwazi Arab minorities are strongest. (Precedents for this terror campaign include previous CIA-run campaigns in Afghanistan in the 1980s, using car bombs and even camel bombs against the Russians, and in Iraq in the 1990s, using car bombs and other explosives in an attempt to destabilize Saddam Hussein's regime.)

Add to this combustible mix the unwillingness of the Iranians to suspend their nuclear enrichment activities, even for a matter of weeks, while negotiating with the Europeans over their nuclear program. Throw in as well various threats from Iranian officials in response to the possibility of a U.S. or Israeli attack on their nuclear facilities, and any number of other alarums, semi-official predictions ("A senior defense official told ABC News there is an 'increasing likelihood' that Israel will carry out such an attack…"), reports, rumors, and warnings -- and it's hardly surprising that the political Internet has been filled with alarming (as well as alarmist) pieces claiming that an assault on Iran may be imminent.

Seymour Hersh, who certainly has his ear to the ground in Washington, has publicly suggested that an Obama victory might be the signal for the Bush administration to launch an air campaign against that country. As Jim Lobe of Inter Press Service has pointed out, there have been a number of "public warnings by U.S. hawks close to Cheney's office that either the Israelis or the U.S. would attack Iran between the November elections and the inaugural of a new president in January 2009."

Given the Bush administration's "preventive war" doctrine which has opened the way for the launching of wars without significant notice or obvious provocation, and the penchant of its officials to ignore reality, all of this should frighten anyone. In fact, it's not only war critics who are increasingly edgy. In recent months, jumpy (and greedy) commodity traders, betting on a future war, have boosted these fears. (Every bit of potential bad news relating to Iran only seems to push the price of a barrel of oil further into the stratosphere.) And mainstream pundits and journalists are increasingly joining them.

No wonder. It's a remarkably frightening scenario, and, if there's one lesson this administration has taught us these last years, it's that nothing's "off the table," not for officials who, only a few years ago, believed themselves capable of creating their own reality and imposing it on the planet. An "unnamed Administration official" -- generally assumed to be Karl Rove -- famously put it this way to journalist Ron Suskind back in October 2004:


"[He] said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. 'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. 'We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors.... and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'"

A Future Global Oil Shock

Nonetheless, sometimes -- as in Iraq -- reality has a way of biting back, no matter how mad or how powerful the imperial dreamer. So, let's consider reality for a moment. When it comes to Iran, reality means oil and natural gas. These days, any twitch of trouble, or potential trouble, affecting the petroleum market, no matter how minor -- from Mexico to Nigeria -- forces the price of oil another bump higher.

Possessing the world's second largest reserves of oil and natural gas, Iran is no speed bump on the energy map. The National Security Network, a group of national security experts, estimates that the Bush administration's policy of bluster, threat, and intermittent low-level actions against Iran has already added a premium of $30-$40 to every $140 barrel of oil. Then there was the one-day $11 spike after Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz suggested that an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities was "unavoidable."

Given that, let's imagine, for a moment, what almost any version of an air assault -- Israeli, American, or a combination of the two -- would be likely to do to the price of oil. When asked recently by Brian Williams on NBC Nightly News about the effects of an Israeli attack on Iran, correspondent Richard Engel responded: "I asked an oil analyst that very question. He said, 'The price of a barrel of oil? Name your price: $300, $400 a barrel.'" Former CIA official Robert Baer suggested in Time Magazine that such an attack would translate into $12 gas at the pump. ("One oil speculator told me that oil would hit $200 a barrel within minutes.")

Those kinds of price leaps could take place in the panic that preceded any Iranian response. But, of course, the Iranians, no matter how badly hit, would be certain to respond -- by themselves and through proxies in the region in a myriad of possible ways. Iranian officials have regularly been threatening all sorts of hell should they be attacked, including "blitzkrieg tactics" in the region. Oil Minister Gholam Hossein Nozari typically swore that his country would "react fiercely, and nobody can imagine what would be the reaction of Iran." The head of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, Mohammed Jafari, said: "Iran's response to any military action will make the invaders regret their decision and action." ("Mr. Jafari had already warned that if attacked, Iran would launch a barrage of missiles at Israel and close the Strait of Hormuz, the outlet for oil tankers leaving the Persian Gulf.") Ali Shirazi, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's representative to the Revolutionary Guards, offered the following: "The first bullet fired by America at Iran will be followed by Iran burning down its vital interests around the globe."

Let's take a moment to imagine just what some of the responses to any air assault might be. The list of possibilities is nearly endless and many of them would be hard even for the planet's preeminent military power to prevent. They might include, as a start, the mining of the Strait of Hormuz, through which a significant portion of the world's oil passes, as well as other disruptions of shipping in the region. (Don't even think about what would happen to insurance rates for oil tankers!)

In addition, American troops on their mega-bases in Iraq, rather than being a powerful force in any attack -- Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has already cautioned President Bush that Iraqi territory cannot be used to attack Iran -- would instantly become so many hostages to Iranian actions, including the possible targeting of those bases by missiles. Similarly, U.S. supply lines for those troops, running from Kuwait past the southern oil port of Basra might well become hostages of a different sort, given the outrage that, in Shiite regions of Iraq, would surely follow an attack. Those lines would assumedly not be impossible to disrupt.

Imagine, as well, what possible disruptions of the modest Iraqi oil supply might mean in the chaos of the moment, with Iranian oil already off the market. Then consider what the targeting of even small numbers of Iranian missiles on the Saudi and Kuwaiti oil fields could do to global oil markets. (It might not even matter whether they actually hit anything.) And that, of course, just scratches the surface of the range of retaliatory possibilities available to Iranian leaders.

Looked at another way, Iran is a weak regional power (which hasn't invaded another country in living memory) that nonetheless retains a remarkable capacity to inflict grievous harm locally, regionally, and globally.

Such a scenario would result in a global oil shock of almost inconceivable proportions. For any American who believes that he or she is experiencing "pain at the pump" right now, just wait until you experience what a true global oil shock would involve.

And that's without even taking into consideration what spreading chaos in the oil heartlands of the planet might mean, or what might happen if Hezbollah or Hamas took action of any sort against Israel, and Israel responded. Mohamed ElBaradei, the sober-minded head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, considering the situation, said the following: "A military strike, in my opinion, would be worse than anything possible. It would turn the region into a fireball..."

This, then, is the baseline for any discussion of an attack on Iran. This is reality, and it has to be daunting for an administration that already finds itself militarily stretched to the limit, unable even to find the reinforcements it wants to send into Afghanistan.

Can Israel Attack Iran?

Let's leave to the experts the question of whether Israel could actually launch an effective air strike against Iranian nuclear facilities on its own -- about which there are grave doubts. And let's instead try to imagine what it would mean for Israel to launch such an assault (egged on by the Vice President's faction in the U.S. government) in the last months, or even weeks, of the second term of an especially lame lame-duck President and an historically unpopular administration.

From Iran's foreign minister, we already know that the Iranians would treat an Israeli attack as if it were an American one, whether or not American planes were involved -- and little wonder. For one thing, Israeli planes heading for Iran would undoubtedly have to cross Iraqi air space, at present controlled by the United States, not the nearly air-force-less Maliki government. (In fact, in Status of Forces Agreement negotiations with the Iraqis, the Bush administration has demanded that the U.S. retain control of that air space, up to 29,000 feet, after December 31, 2008, when the U.N. mandate runs out.)

In other words, on the eve of the arrival of a new American administration, Israel, a small, vulnerable Middle Eastern state deeply reliant on its American alliance, would find itself responsible for starting an American war (associated with a Vice President of unparalleled unpopularity) and for a global oil shock of staggering proportions, if not a global great depression. It would also be the proximate cause for a regional "fireball." (Oil-poor Israel would undoubtedly also be economically wounded by its own strike.)

In addition, the latest American National Intelligence Estimate on Iran concluded that the Iranians stopped weaponizing parts of their nuclear program back in 2003, and American intelligence reputedly doubts recent Israeli warnings that Iran is on the verge of a bomb. Of course, Israel itself has an estimated -- though unannounced -- nuclear force of about 200 such weapons.

Simply put, it is next to inconceivable that the present riven Israeli government would be politically capable of launching such an attack on Iran on its own, or even in combination with only a faction, no matter how important, in the U.S. government. And such a point is more or less taken for granted by many Israelis (and Iranians). Without a full-scale "green light" from the Bush administration, launching such an attack could be tantamount to long-term political suicide.

Only in conjunction with an American attack would an Israeli attack (rash to the point of madness even then) be likely. So let's turn to the Bush administration and consider what might be called the Hersh scenario.

Will the Bush administration Attack Iran If Obama Is Elected?

The first problem is a simple one. Oil, which was at $146 a barrel last week, dropped to $136 (in part because of a statement by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad dismissing "the possibility that war with the United States and Israel was imminent"), and, on Wednesday rose a dollar to $137 in reaction to Iranian missile tests. But, whatever its immediate zigs and zags, the overall pattern of the price of oil seems clear enough. Some suggest that, by the time of any Obama victory, a barrel of crude oil will be at $170. The chairman of the giant Russian oil monopoly Gazprom recently predicted that it would hit $250 within 18 months -- and that's without an attack on Iran.

For those eager to launch a reasonably no-pain campaign against Iran, the moment is already long gone. Every leap in the price of oil only emphasizes the pain to come. In turn, that means, with every passing day, it's madder -- and harder -- to launch such an attack. There is already significant opposition within the administration; the American people, feeling pain, are unprepared for and, as polls indicate, massively unwilling to sanction such an attack. There can be no question that the Bush legacy, such as it is, would be secured in infamy forever and a day.

Now, consider recent administration actions on North Korea. Facing a "reality" that first-term Bush officials would have abjured, the President and his advisors not only negotiated with that nuclearized Axis of Evil nation, but are now removing it from the Trading with the Enemy Act list and the State Sponsor of Terrorism list. No matter what steps Kim Jong Il's regime has taken, including blowing up the cooling tower at the Yongbyon reactor, this is nothing short of a stunning reversal for this administration. An angry John Bolton, standing in for the Cheney faction, compared what happened to a "police truce with the Mafia." And Vice President Cheney's anger over the decision -- and the policy -- was visible and widely reported.

It's possible, of course, that Cheney and associates are simply holding their fire for what they care most about, but here's another question that needs to be considered: Does George W. Bush actually support his imperial Vice President in the manner he once did? There's no way to know, but Bush has always been a more important figure in the administration than many critics like to imagine. The North Korean decision indicates that Cheney may not have a free hand from the President on Iran policy either.

The Adults in the Room

And what about the opposition? I'm not talking about those of us out here who would oppose such a strike. I mean within the world of Bush's Washington. Forget the Democrats. They hardly count and, as Hersh has pointed out, their leadership already signed off on that $400 million covert destabilization campaign.

I mean the adults in the room, who have been in short supply indeed these last years in the Bush administration, specifically Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen. (Condoleezza Rice evidently falls into this camp as well, although she's proven herself something of a President-enabling nonentity over the years.)

With former Carter National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, Gates tellingly co-chaired a task force sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations back in 2004 which called for negotiations with Iran. He arrived at the Pentagon early in 2007 as an envoy from the world of George H.W. Bush and as a man on a mission. He was there to staunch the madness and begin the clean up in the imperial Augean stables.

In his Congressional confirmation hearings, he was absolutely clear: any attack on Iran would be a "very last resort." Sometimes, in the bureaucratic world of Washington, a single "very" can tell you what you need to know. Until then, administration officials had been referring to an attack on Iran simply as a "last resort." He also offered a bloodcurdling scenario for what the aftermath of such an American attack might be like:


"It's always awkward to talk about hypotheticals in this case. But I think that while Iran cannot attack us directly militarily, I think that their capacity to potentially close off the Persian Gulf to all exports of oil, their potential to unleash a significant wave of terror both in the -- well, in the Middle East and in Europe and even here in this country is very real… Their ability to get Hezbollah to further destabilize Lebanon I think is very real. So I think that while their ability to retaliate against us in a conventional military way is quite limited, they have the capacity to do all of the things, and perhaps more, that I just described."

And perhaps more… That puts it in a nutshell.

Hersh, in his most recent piece on the administration's covert program in Iran, reports the following:


"A Democratic senator told me that, late last year, in an off-the-record lunch meeting, Secretary of Defense Gates met with the Democratic caucus in the Senate. (Such meetings are held regularly.) Gates warned of the consequences if the Bush Administration staged a preemptive strike on Iran, saying, as the senator recalled, 'We'll create generations of jihadists, and our grandchildren will be battling our enemies here in America.' Gates's comments stunned the Democrats at the lunch."

In other words, back in 2007, early and late, our new secretary of defense managed to sound remarkably like one of those Iranian officials issuing warnings. Gates, who has a long history as a skilled Washington in-fighter, has once again proven that skill. So far, he seems to have outmaneuvered the Cheney faction.

The March "resignation" of CENTCOM commander Admiral William J. Fallon, outspokenly against an administration strike on Iran, sent both a shiver of fear through war critics and a new set of attack scenarios coursing through the political Internet, as well as into the world of the mainstream media. As reporter Jim Lobe points out at his invaluable Lobelog blog, however, Admiral Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and Gates's man in the Pentagon, has proven nothing short of adamant when it comes to the inadvisabilty of attacking Iran.

His recent public statements have actually been stronger than Fallon's (and the position he fills is obviously more crucial than CENTCOM commander). Lobe comments that, at a July 2nd press conference at the Pentagon, Mullen "repeatedly made clear that he opposes an attack on Iran -- whether by Israel or his own forces -- and, moreover, favors dialogue with Tehran, without the normal White House nuclear preconditions."

Mullen, being an adult, has noticed the obvious. As columnist Jay Bookman of the Atlanta Constitution put the matter recently: "A U.S. attack on Iran's nuclear installations would create trouble that we aren't equipped to handle easily, not with ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, drove that point home in a press conference last week at the Pentagon."

The Weight of Reality

Here's the point: Yes, there is a powerful faction in this administration, headed by the Vice President, which has, it seems, saved its last rounds of ammunition for a strike against Iran. The question, of course, is: Are they still capable of creating "their own reality" and imposing it, however briefly, on the planet? Every tick upwards in the price of oil says no. Every day that passes makes an attack on Iran harder to pull off.

On this subject, panic may be everywhere in the world of the political Internet, and even in the mainstream, but it's important not to make the mistake of overestimating these political actors or underestimating the forces arrayed against them. It's a reasonable proposition today -- as it wasn't perhaps a year ago -- that, whatever their desires, they will not, in the end, be able to launch an attack on Iran; that, even where there's a will, there may not be a way.

They would have to act, after all, against the unfettered opposition of the American people; against leading military commanders who, even if obliged to follow a direct order from the President, have other ways to make their wills known; against key figures in the administration; and, above all, against reality which bears down on them with a weight that is already staggering -- and still growing.

And yet, of course, for the maddest gamblers and dystopian dreamers in our history, never say never.

Tom Engelhardt, co-founder of the American Empire Project, runs the Nation Institute's TomDispatch.com. The World According to TomDispatch: America in the New Age of Empire (Verso, 2008), a collection of some of the best pieces from his site, has just been published. Focusing on what the mainstream media hasn't covered, it is an alternative history of the mad Bush years. A brief video in which Engelhardt discusses American mega-bases in Iraq can be viewed by clicking here.

Copyright 2008 Tom Engelhardt

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174953/why_cheney_won_t_take_down_iran

[bigron]

About the straits of Hormuz !!

The biggest and unmentioned weapon Iran has to block the straits

Is to SINK THEIR OWN GIGANTIC TANKERS THAT COME IN AND OUT DAILY

We must remember that this tactic was used before when many ships were sunk in
the SUEZ CANAL  and  the canal was blocked for years !!

Just Imagine what a MESS something like this would be !!!

[bigron]

If It Ain’t Broke, Don’t Fix It!

By Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20261.htm

09/07/08 "ICH" -- -- On July 7th, U.S. navy announced that it would carry out exercises in the Persian Gulf. Commodore Peter Hudson claimed that these exercises were being carried out to protect “maritime infrastructure such as gas and oil installations”. As the expression goes, ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’. If in the 1980s the United States managed to fool the world into believing that it was protecting the crude oil passage with its naval build up in the Persian Gulf, 20 or so years later it can use the same argument and no one will be the wiser for it. After all, most people think that “relying on foreign oil” is a sin and any act, even ensuring the flow of ‘foreign oil’ justifies provocative U.S. action.

But before we send our boys to protect our interests in someone else’s back yard, lets examine what happened in the 80s that makes these brave men report for duty so readily, and confident in their success.

It has always been the U.S. position that it should be the only country allowed to dominate the region, notwithstanding Israel of course. When the war between Iran and Iraq broke out (1980-88), it gave Regan the perfect pretext to send the navy to ‘protect the passage of oil’. Later however, a Congressional report found that during 1981-1987, the U.S. naval buildup had made shipping more dangerous. The aggressive naval buildup in the Persian Gulf was to provoke Iran into war in order to secure alliances in the region. It was no accident that in 1987, the U.S. fired on a UAE fishing boat thinking it was Iranian[ii].

Furthermore, while the U.S. has often declared that the shooting down of a civilian Iranian airliner and the killing of all 290 passengers by the Vicennes was an accident, the commander of another U.S. ship in the Persian Gulf has said that while "the conduct of Iranian military forces in the month preceding the incident was pointedly non-threatening," the actions of the Vicennes "appeared to be consistently aggressive”. The Vicennes inclination to kill ruthlessly earned it the nickname “Robo Cruiser”[iii]

At the cost of innocent lives, prompting the continuation of the Iran-Iraq war which many blame solely on Khomeini-- thanks to Washington, the U.S. reached its main objective. The tensions caused the Arab states to turn to the United States for security and protection in return for which, the U.S. built bases for expanding its empire and was paid for it. On a per capita basis, the Persian Gulf states are the biggest spenders of “protection money’. Bahrain pays a total of $53.4 million, Kuwait 252.9 million, Qatar 81.3, and United Arab Emirates $217.4 million[iv].

Mr. Bush is following in Reagan’s footsteps. With Israeli military maneuvers threatening war and provoking Iran without any protest from the international community, Mr. Bush has ordered a naval buildup in the Persian Gulf for ‘protecting’ the safe flow of oil. No doubt, the U.S. navy will be hard at work provoking Iran and the tension caused will enable the U.S. to demand more ‘protection money’ from the Arab states; even though they have been amply armed by the biggest arm-dealer in the world – the United States. Should Iran fail to respond to America’s provocations, no doubt a false flag operation will be substituted.

The navy is off to protect the $140 per barrel of oil which before the Iraq invasion was under $30/barrel. If history is any indication, the naval buildup, Israel’s bellicose and expansionist policies, the Iraq war, and Mr. Bush’s personal history of repeated failures, all implications are that America is headed for disaster, taking with it all those who ‘are with us’, and destroying all those ‘who are with them’.

Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich is an Iranian-American studying at the University of Southern California. Her research focus is U.S. foreign policy and the influence of lobby groups. She is a peace activist, essayist, and public speaker.

NOTES
War in the Persian Gulf: The U.S. Takes Sides, staff report to the Committee on Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate, 1987.

[ii] Ronald O'Rourke, "The Tanker War" (1988)

[iii]Stephen Shalom “The United States and the Iran-Iraq War: 1990”

[iv] Chalmers Johnson ‘Commission on Review of Overseas Military Facility Structure, Report p.Mp’

[scary]

 CNN Headline has changed, we are at 2nd test fire now, within 5 hours or so.



(CNN) -- Iran test-fired more missiles overnight, Iranian news media reported Thursday, one day after it tested a long-range Shahab-3 and other missiles in the Persian Gulf region.


Iran test-fired missiles overnight, Iranian media said Thursday, near the Persian Gulf.

1 of 2 The tests came only hours after U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the United States is determined to prevent Iran from threatening its interests or those of its allies.

At a news conference in the Georgian capital of Tblisi, Rice said the United States has been working with allies to "make certain that they are capable of defending themselves" against any threat from Iran.

"We take very strongly our obligation to help our allies defend themselves and no one should be confused about that," Rice said.  Watch Rice comment on Iranian missiles »

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has said that the missiles involved in Thursday's test were medium and long-range.

The Iranian news agency Fars said the launches, near the Persian Gulf, were a continuation of Wednesday's maneuvers and that the missiles hit their targets successfully.

Iran's Press TV said a "Hoot" torpedo was among those tested. "The maneuvers have also included IRGC scuba divers and marines who conducted practice assaults with speedboats on hypothetical enemy targets," the station added.  Watch Iran's latest test-firing of missiles »

Two year ago a report by Jane's Information Group, which provides information on defense issues, described the "Hoot" or Whale as a sonar-evading underwater missile that Iran had said was "one of the fastest in the world" and "able to outpace warships."

World powers, which have long suspected that Iran is intent on building nuclear weapons, have offered economic and other incentives to Iran in exchange for the suspension of its enrichment program.

Iran, which says its nuclear program is strictly to produce energy, defends its right to proceed with enrichment.

Iran accuses Israel of trying to destabilize the republic; Israel has not ruled out military action to halt Iran's nuclear aspirations.

There are fears that Israel, which has long been concerned that Iran wants to attack the Jewish state, is pondering a unilateral strike against the Islamic Republic.

"If Washington and Tel Aviv are foolish enough to even consider attacking Iran, our initial response would be to target Israel and set U.S. interests in the Persian Gulf ablaze," Ali Shirazi, an aide to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said Tuesday.

The Shahab-3 missile has a range of about 2,000 km, putting all of Israel, Turkey, Pakistan and the Arabian peninsula within striking distance. From Iran the missile's reach extends from southern Russia to the Horn of Africa, from south-eastern Europe to Nepal.  See where Iran's missiles could strike »

Zelzal and Fateh missiles were also tested Wednesday during a military exercise called The Great Prophet III, described as a "joint maneuver" by guard corps naval and ground forces in the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz region.

The Iranian exercises come a month after an Israeli military drill in the eastern Mediterranean involving dozens of warplanes and aerial tanks. It was seen as a message that Israel has the capability to attack Iran's nuclear program.

Israel issued the same reaction Thursday that it did to Wednesday's missile test. "Israel seeks neither conflict nor hostilities with Iran, but the Iranian nuclear program and the Iranian ballistic missile program must be of concern for the entire International community."

Israel was due Thursday to display an advanced aircraft that is capable of spying on Iran. Israel's Army Radio told CNN that the Eitam airplane is a "practical answer" to recent Iranian "threats."

But Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) -- which manufactures aircraft for both military and civilian use -- said the exhibit is not linked to Israel's recent "tensions" with Iran.

Rather, the airplane is being shown near Ben Gurion International Airport, southeast of Tel Aviv, because it will be at the prestigious Farnborough International Air Show in southern England next week, an IAI spokeswoman said. Watch

The plane, a Gulfstream G550 business jet that has been modified with sophisticated intelligence-gathering systems, is already part of the Israeli Air Force's fleet.

In her speech Thursday, Rice said that a missile defense shield the United States hopes to create in Eastern Europe would be another way to head off any threat from Iran.

"These are all elements of America's intention and determination to prevent Iran from threatening our interests or the interests of our friends and allies, and I don't think the Iranians are too confused, either, about the capability and the power of the United States to do exactly that," she said.

Rice encouraged Iran to "get on the right side of the international community" by accepting a package of incentives put forward by China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States -- the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council -- as well as Germany.

Iran "ought to be talking about that, not about threats against America or threats against America's allies because frankly it's not going to do them any good."

Iranian Defense Minister Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar, speaking after Wednesday's tests said Iran's "missile capacity is just for defensive purposes, to safeguard peace in Iran and the Persian Gulf region."


The minister added that "our missiles will not be used to threaten any country, they are only intended for those who dare attack Iran."

In 1981, Israel, which itself is believed to have nuclear weapons, attacked a nuclear facility in Iraq. Israel also struck a site in Syria this year that some say was a nuclear reactor under construction

[bigron]

Analysis: US and Iran appear on collision course

Analysis: US and Iran seem set on Mideast collision course, missile tests raise tensions anew

MATTHEW LEE
AP News
http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=246000
Jul 09, 2008 15:55 EST

The United States and Iran appear on a collision course in the Middle East, firing off mixed messages that are raising world tension and roiling oil markets amid fears that an eventual confrontation may be military.

Both insist war is not imminent, but their sharp words and provocative actions are stoking uncertainty as Washington and Tehran joust for strategic supremacy in the oil-rich region where American might — along with that of its top ally in the area, Israel — has long been dominant.

Concern spiked on Wednesday when Iran test-fired nine long- and medium-range missiles during war games in the Strait of Hormuz, aiming to show it can retaliate against any U.S. or Israeli attack. The display followed a joint military exercise by Israel and Greece last month in the Mediterranean that many saw as a warning to Iran.

The Iranian missile tests drew a quick response from Washington, which said the launches were further reason not to trust a country that it already accuses of fomenting instability in Iraq, supporting Israel's foes and attempting to build nuclear weapons. The testing sent oil prices higher before they calmed down later in the day.

This despite the fact that leaders on both sides — President Bush and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — had just this week tried to tamp down speculation that the use of force is inevitable.

As he nears the end of his presidency, Bush says repeatedly that diplomacy is his preferred option to deal with any threat posed by Iran's nuclear program, although he has just as often refused to take the military option off the table. Ahmadinejad, who has often spoken of wiping Israel off the map, this week dismissed talk of war as a "funny joke."

"I assure you that there won't be any war in the future," Ahmadinejad said Tuesday during a visit to Malaysia.

Shortly after Wednesday's missile tests, the White House didn't fling out any dire new warnings to Iran but settled for saying the testing was "completely inconsistent with Iran's obligations to the world" and served to further isolate the country.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stood clear of discussing possible military responses, arguing that the tests instead were proof that a proposed missile shield for Europe, a system that has drawn vehement opposition from Russia, is vital to defending U.S. interests and allies.

At a Pentagon news conference, Gates allowed that there had been a "lot of signaling going on" in the escalation of rhetoric between Iran, Israel and the U.S., but he added he does not think confrontation is closer.

So why does speculation about conflict continue to grow?

A main reason may be that neither side appears able to judge the other's true intent.

U.S. officials say they can't discern Iran's motivations, citing the closed nature of the regime and ostensible differences between the country's hardline Islamic religious leaders, its Revolutionary Guards and moderates. Some Iranian leaders may want peace, but not others, they say.

While Ahmadinejad tones down his rhetoric, others in Tehran have stepped up warnings of retaliation if the Americans — or Israelis — launch military action against Iran's nuclear sites. They threaten to hit Israel and U.S. regional bases with missiles and stop oil traffic through the vital Gulf region.

Wednesday's launches "demonstrate our resolve and might against enemies who in recent weeks have threatened Iran with harsh language," said Gen. Hossein Salami, the Revolutionary Guard's air force commander, according to state media. "Our hands are always on the trigger and our missiles are ready for launch," he was quoted as saying.

At the same time, the Iranian leadership may face a similar quandary in judging U.S. intentions. While Bush, Gates and Rice are stressing diplomacy, other, more hawkish, elements of the administration, notably Vice President Dick Cheney, are using more bellicose language similar to that of Israeli officials who have been more outspoken about the possible use of force.

And, with Bush's second term waning, Iran's calculations are also likely to be guided by what it thinks the policies of the next U.S. president will be.

The Republican and Democratic candidates, John McCain and Barack Obama, both agree Iran is a threat. But they differ on how to deal with it.

Obama said the tests underscored the need for direct diplomacy with Tehran, while McCain's response mirrored that of the Bush administration and focused on tougher sanctions against Iran.

Some analysts believe Bush will act militarily against Iran before he leaves office in six months and that if he doesn't, McCain will, if he is elected.

John Pike, the director of GlobalSecurity.org, a defense, security and space intelligence consultancy, is one.

"Bombing is either going to be the last thing Mr. Bush does or the first thing Mr. McCain does," he said.

___

EDITOR'S NOTE: Matthew Lee covers U.S. foreign policy for the Associated Press and has reported on diplomacy and international affairs for 14 years.

Source: AP News

[bigron]

Iran threat: We will burn American navy and set Israel alight if attacked, says Khamenei aide


Jul 09, 2008
http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=245470

Iran kept up a barrage of conflicting messages over its nuclear programme yesterday, threatening to strike the US navy and "set Israel alight" if it was attacked.

But Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president, dismissed the threat of war as a "silly joke", even as he again rejected the idea that Iran halt uranium enrichment - the key demand of the international community repeated at the G8 summit in Japan.

The strongest language came from Ali Shirazi, an aide to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has ultimate say over the most sensitive issues.

"The first US shot against Iran would set the United States' vital interests in the world on fire," said Shirazi, a cleric who is Khamenei's representative to the elite Revolutionary Guards naval forces.

"Tel Aviv and the US fleet in the Persian Gulf would be the targets that would be set on fire in Iran's crushing response," he said, the Fars news agency reported.

Analysts said that while Iran has often warned of a crushing response to any aggression, specific warnings of this kind are unusual. The phrase echoed threats made by Saddam Hussein against Israel on the eve of the 1991 Gulf war.

It was the latest in a series of now almost daily exchanges over Iran's nuclear programme including signals from Israel and the US that they would not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran. Washington and its allies accuse Iran of secretly working to develop a nuclear weapon. Tehran says it has no military ambitions and is simply seeking to generate power for civil purposes.

Shirazi's remarks came as Revolutionary Guard missile and naval units began war games - codenamed The Great Prophet III - aimed at "improving the combat capability" of the forces. The Guards are responsible for Iran's most significant ballistic missiles including the Shahab-3, whose range puts Israel and US bases in the Gulf within reach.

Ahmadinejad told a news conference in Malaysia that he hoped to see a fresh approach by the next US administration to make up for the "domineering hegemony" of George Bush. "I assure you that there won't be any war in the future," he said, predicting that Israel's "regime" would collapse without the need for Iranian action. He dismissed the idea of war as "a silly joke." The US was no longer in a position to attack Iran. "In the US, his wise scholars will not allow Mr Bush to commit political suicide and of course the economic, political and military situation will not allow Mr Bush to do that," he said.

Ahmadinejad also told the leaders of the G8 that their policies would "accelerate them along the road to a precipice" and reiterated he would not accept demands to stop enriching uranium, which can be used as fuel for nuclear power plants and to make warheads if refined to a higher degree.

Despite these comments, diplomacy is still being actively pursued. Javier Solana, the EU's foreign policy chief, is to return to Iran for talks with its top nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, before the end of the month, Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, told reporters at the G8 summit.

Solana presented Iran with a revised package of economic, technical and political incentives last month on behalf of the five permanent members of the UN security council, plus Germany.

Crucially, the package includes an offer of assistance with civilian nuclear technology that has been widely publicised in the Iranian media and appears to have helped stimulate a lively internal debate among the country's leaders. Solana described Tehran's weekend response as a "complicated and difficult letter that must be thoroughly analysed".

French officials said the Iranian document failed to mention halting uranium enrichment or a reciprocal "freeze for freeze" which would halt sanctions against Iran. "There is no give on the substance whatsoever," said one diplomat.

Source: guardian.co.uk

[scary]

CNN) -- U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice -- responding to Iran's latest test-firings of missiles -- has made it clear Thursday her country is determined to prevent Tehran from threatening the interests of itself and allies like Israel.


Iran test-fired missiles overnight, Iranian media said Thursday, near the Persian Gulf.

1 of 2 Rice was speaking at a news conference in the Georgian capital of Tblisi after Iran test-fired a long-range missile. According to Iranian state media, Iran conducted more test-firings Thursday.

Rice said the United States has been working with allies to "make certain that they are capable of defending themselves" against any threat from Iran.

"We take very strongly our obligation to help our allies defend themselves and no one should be confused about that," she said.  Watch Rice comment on Iranian missiles »

Rice's remarks came after Iranian leaders said they would strike at Israel and close the Straits of Hormuz if Iran was attacked.

Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said the missiles involved in Thursday's test were medium and long-range.

The Iranian news agency Fars said the launches, near the Persian Gulf, were a continuation of Wednesday's maneuvers and that the missiles hit their targets successfully.

Iran's Press TV said a "Hoot" torpedo was among those tested. "The maneuvers have also included IRGC scuba divers and marines who conducted practice assaults with speedboats on hypothetical enemy targets," the station added.  Watch Iran's latest test-firing of missiles »

Two years ago a report by Jane's Information Group, which provides information on defense issues, described the "Hoot" or Whale as a sonar-evading underwater missile that Iran had said was "one of the fastest in the world" and "able to outpace warships."

World powers, which have long suspected that Iran is intent on building nuclear weapons, have offered economic and other incentives to Iran in exchange for the suspension of its enrichment program.



Iran accuses Israel of trying to destabilize the republic; Israel has not ruled out military action to halt Iran's nuclear aspirations.

There are fears that Israel, which has long been concerned that Iran wants to attack the Jewish state, is pondering a unilateral strike against the Islamic Republic.

"If Washington and Tel Aviv are foolish enough to even consider attacking Iran, our initial response would be to target Israel and set U.S. interests in the Persian Gulf ablaze," Ali Shirazi, an aide to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said Tuesday.

The Shahab-3 missile has a range of about 2,000 km, putting all of Israel, Turkey, Pakistan and the Arabian peninsula within striking distance. From Iran the missile's reach extends from southern Russia to the Horn of Africa, from south-eastern Europe to Nepal.  See where Iran's missiles could strike »

Zelzal and Fateh missiles were also tested Wednesday during a military exercise called The Great Prophet III, described as a "joint maneuver" by guard corps naval and ground forces in the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz region.

The Iranian exercises come a month after an Israeli military drill in the eastern Mediterranean involving dozens of warplanes and aerial tanks. It was seen as a message that Israel has the capability to attack Iran's nuclear program.

Israel issued the same reaction Thursday that it did to Wednesday's missile test. "Israel seeks neither conflict nor hostilities with Iran, but the Iranian nuclear program and the Iranian ballistic missile program must be of concern for the entire International community."

Israel was due Thursday to display an advanced aircraft that is capable of spying on Iran. Israel's Army Radio told CNN that the Eitam airplane is a "practical answer" to recent Iranian "threats."

But Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) -- which manufactures aircraft for both military and civilian use -- said the exhibit was not linked to Israel's recent "tensions" with Iran.

Rather, the airplane is being shown near Ben Gurion International Airport, southeast of Tel Aviv, because it will be at Farnborough International Air Show in southern England next week, an IAI spokeswoman said.


The plane, a Gulfstream G550 business jet that has been modified with sophisticated intelligence-gathering systems, is already part of the Israeli Air Force's fleet.

In her speech Thursday, Rice said a missile defense shield the United States hopes to create in Eastern Europe would be another way to head off any threat from Iran.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/10/missile.iran/index.html

By the way, I'm achiving the changes of the story names with screenshots just as a way to have evidence, on how the media...pumps the situation up to the public slowly...slowly so when the war happens it's not so unnaceptable to the Sheeps. Like a frog in a pan on the stove, slowly turns up the heat until bam your cooked.

[epinlasvegas]

I could not get the whole story but its on www.drudgereport.com its a photoshopped picture with an added missile to make Iran seem scarierm      n orange). (Illustration by The New York Times; photo via Agence France-Presse)Updated, 9:33 a.m., Agence France-Presse has retracted the image as “apparently digitally altered.”
As news spread across the world of Iran’s provocative missile tests, so did an image of four missiles heading skyward in unison. Unfortunately, it appeared to contain one too many missiles, a point that had not emerged before the photo appeared on the front pages of The Los Angeles Times, The Financial Times, The Chicago Tribune and several other newspapers as well as on BBC News, MSNBC, Yahoo! News, NYTimes.com and many other major news Web sites.


The Los Angeles Times, The Palm Beach Post and Chicago Tribune, among others, used the image on the front pages on Thursday.
Our homepage at 3:56 p.m. on Wednesday. Agence France-Presse said that it obtained the image from the Web site of Sepah News, the media arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, on Wednesday. But there was no sign of it there later in the day. Today, The Associated Press distributed what appeared to be a nearly identical photo from the same source, but without the fourth missile.
As the above illustration shows, the second missile from the right appears to be the sum of two other missiles in the image. The contours of the billowing smoke match perfectly near the ground, as well in the immediate wake of the missile. Only a small black dot in the reddish area of exhaust seems to differ from the missile to its left, though there are also some slight variations in the color of the smoke and the sky.
Does Iran’s state media use Photoshop? The charge has been leveled before. So far, though, it can’t be said with any certainty whether there is any official Iranian involvement in this instance. Sepah apparently published the three-missile version of the image today without further explanation.
For its part, Agence France-Presse retracted its four-missile version this morning, saying that the image was “apparently digitally altered” by Iranian state media. The fourth missile “has apparently been added in digital retouch to cover a grounded missile that may have failed during the test,” the agency said.

[Optimus]

Barak warns Iran 'we won't hesitate to act'
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3566697,00.html

Defense minister issues stern warning aimed at Tehran, says 'Israel is the strongest country in the region, and it has proven in the past that it is not afraid to act when there its vital interests are threatened'

Attila Somfalvi Published:  07.10.08, 17:27 / Israel News 


With Iran continuing to flex its military muscles with Wednesday's ballistic missile tests, Defense Minister Ehud Barak issued a strongly-worded warning on Thursday evening, warning Tehran that Israel would not hesitate to resort to military action.

"This is a challenge not only for Israel but for the entire world. The focus now is sanctions and diplomatic action. Israel is the strongest country in the region, and it has proven in the past that it is not afraid to act when there its vital interests are threatened," Barak said in an address at the Labor party's Tel Aviv headquarters.

The defense minister urged, however, for caution. "The responses of our adversaries must be taken into account. Hamas, and Hizbullah, and the Syrians, and the Iranians – there is activity all around us. And there exists a potential for confrontation," he said.

"On the other hand, there is also potential for accords, particularly with the Palestinians and the Syrians. We have a moral responsibility to make the most of any chance to reach an agreement with our neighbors. But the considerations are very complex, and we need to see ahead, to work around the obstacles to ensure Israel's security."

[Dan]

On the news last night, they were talking about the missile tests and how it seemed that war was inevitable.  Yet there seems to be diplomatic progress.  That is what they said.

I think that they must promote the idea of diplomacy, whether or not if is happening, just to prove to the American people that they tried.  They really did.

BS!!!  It is propaganda to spin what they have been trying to do for 7.5 years now.

Dan

Today:

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-politics/20080710/POLITICS-GEORGIA-RICE-IRAN-DC/

[Godfather77]

Israel 'ready to act' over Iran
Thursday, 10 July 2008 20:31 UK
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7500342.stm

Israel's defence minister has warned of his country's readiness to act against Iran if it feels threatened. 

Ehud Barak, speaking in Tel Aviv, said Israel had "proved in the past that it won't hesitate to act when its vital security interests are at stake". He spoke as Iran's testing of missiles that could reach Israel stoked tensions between the two, and with the US. But Mr Barak added that diplomatic solutions should be pursued before other options were taken up.

"Currently the focus is international sanctions and vigorous diplomatic activity, and these avenues should be exhausted," he said.

US warning

Over the past two days, the Iranian military has tested missiles, including one that it says could reach Israel.  State media said the tests included the first night launch of the Shahab-3 missile, said to have a range of 2,000km (1,240 miles), along with shore-to-sea, surface-to-surface and sea-to-air missiles.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the US had increased its security in the region and Iran should not be "confused" about US capabilities.

Israel has responded to the missile tests by putting on display one of its aircraft that it says can spy on Iran. The state-run Israel Aerospace Industries says it has equipped its Eitam aeroplane, unveiled a year ago, with sophisticated intelligence-gathering systems.

Mr Barak spoke of the "potential for accords, particularly with the Palestinians and the Syrians", but stressed that the situation was very complex. Quoted by Israeli news website Ynet, Mr Barak said: "We must work towards an accord - but if not, then we must strike our enemy when it is required."

He also warned that Israel must consider the reactions from other nations in the region that could be provoked by action against Iran.

"The responses of our adversaries must be taken into account. Hamas and Hezbollah and the Syrians and the Iranians - there is activity all around us. And there exists a potential for confrontation."

Meanwhile, the AFP news agency has issued a warning that a still image of the missiles being launched, distributed by Iran, was "apparently digitally altered".

The photograph, published on the Iranian Revolutionary Guards website and reproduced by media organisations - including the BBC News website - showed four missiles taking off from a desert launch-pad. But a similar image published by an Iranian magazine showed one of the missiles still in its launcher after apparently failing to fire.

Defence analyst Mark Fitzpatrick of the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies told AFP: "It very much does appear that Iran doctored the photo to cover up what apparently was a misfiring of one of the missiles."

In recent weeks, both Israel and Iran have been testing and showing off their military hardware, each saying that in the event of provocation it is more than capable of defending itself.

The Israeli air force recently carried out a large-scale exercise over the Mediterranean - regarded by many observers as a dress rehearsal should the order be given to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. Israel believes Iran is building nuclear weapons, although Tehran insists its nuclear programme is purely for civilian energy.

Western leaders have been trying to convince Iran to stop enriching uranium, which it has continued doing despite sanctions from the UN and the European Union.

[munkey]

I just saw this article and thought it may be interessting to a few out there about

Israeli jets using Iraq's airspace

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=63218&sectionid=351020201

[Optimus]

I just saw this article and thought it may be interessting to a few out there about

Israeli jets using Iraq's airspace

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=63218&sectionid=351020201

Israeli jets using Iraq's airspace?
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=63218&sectionid=351020201
Thu, 10 Jul 2008 16:33:45
 
 
The US has allowed Israeli jets to use US airbases in Iraq and fly over Iraqi airspace for a likely attack against Iran, Iraqi media say.

It is more than a month that some Israeli planes belonging to Israeli air force use the US military bases in Iraq to land and take off, Iraqi Nahrainnet news network said Wednesday, quoting informed sources close to Iraq's Defense Ministry.

The activities and traffic of warplanes- especially at nights- has lately increased in the US air bases in Nasiriya southeast of Baghdad and Haditha a city in the western Iraq province of Al Anbar, the Iraqi residents and sources said.

They said the US fighters, cargo planes, helicopters and unmanned planes have intensified their flights in the last three weeks.

The US military officials have imposed severe security measures around the bases, they said.

They said some aircraft suspected to be Israeli warplanes coming from Jordan, have landed in the US controlled al-Assad airbase near Haditha.

It is believed that these activities are parts of a joint Israeli-US training, preparation and coordination to launch an air raid against Iran's nuclear plants.

Israel has conducted a military drill under the supervision of top US military commanders over the Mediterranean Sea from May 28 to June 12, using more than 100 Israeli F-16 and F-15 fighters, along with helicopters and refueling tanks which many consider as a possible rehearsal for a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.

[Optimus]

Barak to tell Bush time is running out on thwarting Iran
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1215330934694&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

In a series of consultations apparently aimed at coordinating policies against the Iranian nuclear threat, Defense Minister Ehud Barak will head to the US on Monday for talks at the Pentagon, days after Mossad chief Meir Dagan was in Washington for meetings with key intelligence officials. Sources say Israel is urgently trying to convince the US that Iran is closer to passing the nuclear threshold than Washington believes.

Dagan's visit came as Iran held a second day of military maneuvers on Thursday and claimed to have test-fired more long-range missiles meant to show that the country can defend itself against any attack by the US or Israel.

Barak will spend three days in the US for talks with Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

Defense officials said he would likely also meet with President George W. Bush.

A week after Barak's visit, IDF Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi will head to Washington for his own round of talks with American defense chiefs, including Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen, who was in Israel two weeks ago.

Barak hinted at Israeli readiness to attack the Islamic Republic on Thursday.

"The Iranian issue is a challenge not just for Israel but for the entire world," Barak told a meeting of the Labor Party faction. "Israel is the strongest country in the region and we have proven in the past that we are not deterred from acting when our vital interests are at stake."

But he quickly noted that "the reactions of [Israel's] enemies need to be taken into consideration as well."

A senior government official said the Dagan, Barak, Ashkenazi visits to Washington were part of the "routine, close consultations" held between Israel and the US.

Another government source said it would be an exaggeration to imagine that the meetings had to do with drawing up operational plans for any type of military action against Iran. According to this source, no decision had been made on the matter, and Israel was extremely unlikely to take any unilateral action.

A senior US official recently said there was a discrepancy of six to 12 months between the time Israel believed Iran would pass the nuclear point of no return, and when the US felt Teheran will have mastered the nuclear cycle.

The source added that the visits of the Israeli officials came as an intense debate continued to rage inside the US administration between those who favored military action, led by Cheney, and those opposed, led by Gates.

"Iran's response to Europe is not ambiguous," the official said. "Iran rejects the international demand to halt the enrichment of uranium and the world must respond accordingly - by increasing and intensifying the sanctions against Iran."

Also on Thursday, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni told visiting Irish Foreign Minister Micheál Martin that Teheran posed not only a nuclear threat, but also a "comprehensive" threat because of its support for Hizbullah, Hamas and other extremist elements in the region.

Government officials, meanwhile, did not seem overly concerned about Iran's recent missile tests. One official said both sides were signaling the other that they could cause significant damage. The official put the missile tests in the same category as the reportedly large-scale IAF exercise in the eastern Mediterranean in the first week of June, and a well publicized visit Prime Minister Ehud Olmert made to Dimona on July 1.

In response to the missile tests, Olmert's spokesman Mark Regev said Israel "seeks neither conflict nor does it seek hostilities with Iran. Nevertheless, Iran's nuclear program together with their ballistic missile program should be a matter of grave concern for the entire family of nations."

In the second day of exercises in Iran, the Revolutionary Guards claimed to have tested new weapons with "special capabilities" that included missiles launched from naval ships in the Persian Gulf, along with torpedoes and surface-to-surface missiles. A brief video clip showed two missiles being fired simultaneously in the darkness, followed by red plumes of fire and smoke.

On Wednesday, Iran said it tested a new version of the Shihab-3 missile, which officials have said has a range of 2,000 km. and is armed with a 1-ton conventional warhead. That would put Israel, Turkey, the Arabian peninsula, Afghanistan and Pakistan all within striking distance.

In what could be interpreted as an Israeli response to the two-day Iranian exercise, Israel Aerospace Industries put on display for the press on Thursday the air force's most-sophisticated airborne early-warning and control plane, which would likely be used in any strike against Iranian nuclear installations.

The aircraft's sophisticated radar and intelligence-gathering technology as well as electronic warfare systems were developed by IAI's Elta Division and installed aboard a Gulfstream G550 business jet. The plane arrived in Israel in September 2006 and became operation this past February. The aircraft will also be shown at the Farnborough Air Show in England next week.

[Biggs]

if accurate this is a dangerous development, and if nothign else shows how interlocked the two nations militaries are in terms of executing the NWO plan to break up and dmoinate the Middle East


Iraqi airspace used by Israel, sources say
Published: July 10, 2008

http://www.metimes.com/Security/2008/07/10/iraqi_airspace_used_by_israel_sources_say/0d64/
 
BAGHDAD, July 10 (UPI) -- Israeli fighter jets are thought to be using Iraqi airspace and U.S. bases in Iraq to prepare for an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, Iraqi sources said.

The Iraqi news network Nahrainnet cited anonymous sources in the Iraqi Defense Ministry saying Israeli jets have used Jordanian air space to land at U.S. airbases in Iraq for the past month.

The source said the jets "are probably" part of a training exercise to prepare for an attack against Iran. U.S. cargo planes, unmanned drones and other aerial vehicles have increased their flights during the past few weeks as well, the sources claimed.

Iranian Press TV said Thursday the suspected warplanes are conducting nighttime operations from U.S. airbases in the southern city of Nasiriyah and Haditha in western Anbar province.

Both reports claimed U.S. military officials have imposed strict security measures around the military bases, notably the al-Assad airbase in Haditha.

The Israeli military conducted recent exercises in the Mediterranean Sea in what some observers saw as a warning to Iran.

Iran on Wednesday and Thursday conducted several missile tests in an apparent response to the move.

[bigron]

another article covering Israels use of Iraq airspace and US Bases !!


Israeli jets using Iraq's airspace?

Thu, 10 Jul 2008 16:33:45
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=63218&sectionid=351020201


The US has allowed Israeli jets to use US airbases in Iraq and fly over Iraqi airspace for a likely attack against Iran, Iraqi media say.

It is more than a month that some Israeli planes belonging to Israeli air force use the US military bases in Iraq to land and take off, Iraqi Nahrainnet news network said Wednesday, quoting informed sources close to Iraq's Defense Ministry.

The activities and traffic of warplanes- especially at nights- has lately increased in the US air bases in Nasiriya southeast of Baghdad and Haditha a city in the western Iraq province of Al Anbar, the Iraqi residents and sources said.

They said the US fighters, cargo planes, helicopters and unmanned planes have intensified their flights in the last three weeks.

The US military officials have imposed severe security measures around the bases, they said.

They said some aircraft suspected to be Israeli warplanes coming from Jordan, have landed in the US controlled al-Assad airbase near Haditha.

It is believed that these activities are parts of a joint Israeli-US training, preparation and coordination to launch an air raid against Iran's nuclear plants.

Israel has conducted a military drill under the supervision of top US military commanders over the Mediterranean Sea from May 28 to June 12, using more than 100 Israeli F-16 and F-15 fighters, along with helicopters and refueling tanks which many consider as a possible rehearsal for a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.

DTJ/RA

[bigron]

July 11, 2008

Congressional Hearings Are Needed to Forestall an Attack on Iran
 
by Scott Ritter


There is increasing discussion and speculation about the possibility of an American military strike against Iran prior to President Bush leaving office. The justification for such an attack is derived from Iran's continued refusal to adhere to Security Council demands that it suspend its enrichment of uranium (a program Iran contends is exclusively for peaceful energy purposes) and Bush administration assertions that Iran operates as a state sponsor of terror. While Iran denies any wrongdoing on its part, the Bush administration has successfully positioned itself, both domestically and internationally, so that it is Iran which must demonstrate its innocence of the charges made against it, as opposed to America proving its guilt.


There are those who say that such observations are moot. The Bush administration may want to act against Iran, this thinking goes, but is unable to do so due to an overstretched military strained by open-ended conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan and a worsening economic situation at home brought on, in part, by soaring oil prices, and as such any military attack on Iran would be an act of madness. Such reasoning may not be enough to give pause to those within the Bush administration who cling to an ideology which links the national security of the United States to a transformed Middle East, one where regimes such as the theocracy in Tehran must be eliminated if there is to be any hope of long-term peace and stability. For these true believers, it is not action against Iran which would constitute an act of madness, but rather any failure to act.


Contrary to popular belief, the U.S. military has sufficient military capacity to initiate, and sustain, military strike options ranging from a limited attack against one or two targets, lasting less than a day, to a massive aerial bombardment of Iran lasting 30-45 days. Current speculation holds that the Pentagon is leaning toward the limited strike option, but given the fact that no one can predict how Iran would respond to even a limited air strike against its territory, the potential for escalation exists which finds the United States engaged in an all-out aerial onslaught against Iran is all too real.


Those who look to the Congress of the United States to prevent or forestall an attack against Iran do so in vain. Congressional inaction on the issue of Iran has created a situation where there are no Constitutional impediments to the Bush administration taking military action. Not only has the U.S. Senate passed a non-binding resolution (Kyl-Lieberman) which labels the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Command as a terrorist group, but it has left in place, unchanged, two war powers resolutions (September 2001 and October 2002) which give the President free reign to use military force against the forces of terror, state and non-state sponsored alike. Efforts to have the US Congress make use of its power of the purse to mandate that the President must seek, and get, Congressional approval to strike Iran before any U.S. taxpayer funds can be expended, have likewise failed to gain any momentum. This failure to act itself serves as a facilitator for military action, since it demonstrates not only a lack of will in the U.S. Congress to oppose military action against Iran, but conversely, a recognition on the part of Congress that such action is not only within the right of the President to initiate, but also represents a legitimate course of action.


Those who have formulated the policies of the Bush administration which have placed Iran and America on a collision course have done so not on a whim, but rather based upon deep and sincere ideologically based conviction which holds that such a course of action is in the best interests of the United States. The ideologues who populate the current Bush administration, especially those associated with the Office of the Vice President, imbued with an unprecedented level of influence on matters pertaining to national security and defense, may feel obliged to initiate a military strike against Iran prior to leaving office, not for the purpose of achieving any permanent result, but rather to ensnare a new President in a situation where the political-military options for Iran policy are limited by the reality of ongoing conflict.


It may transpire that there is no military clash between Iran and the U.S. and the future President of the United States enters office free to undertake any policy direction he chooses. However, to sit back and do nothing in hopes of such a scenario unfolding is akin to planning to fund your child's college education by playing the lottery. You might win, but the overwhelming odds are against you. It is high time for Congress to stop gambling on the future of the United States by doing nothing about the issue of Iran. There has never been a more pressing need than the present for Congressional hearings about American policy toward Iran. Getting Congress to act should be the highest priority for every American citizen, before it is too late.
 
 
Find this article at:
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/ritter.php?articleid=13117 

[bigron]

OPEC warns against military conflict with Iran


By James Kanter

Thursday, July 10, 2008
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/10/business/opec.php


VIENNA: The head of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries warned Thursday that oil prices would see an "unlimited" increase in the case of a military conflict involving Iran, because the group's members would be unable to make up the lost production.

"We really cannot replace Iran's production - it's not feasible to replace it," Abdalla Salem El-Badri, the OPEC secretary general, said during an interview.

Iran, the second-largest producing country in OPEC, after Saudi Arabia, produces about 4 million barrels of oil a day out of the daily worldwide production of close to 87 million barrels. The country has been locked in a lengthy dispute with Western countries over its nuclear ambitions.

In recent weeks, the price of oil has risen higher on speculation that Israel could be preparing to attack Iranian nuclear facilities. The saber-rattling intensified this week with missile tests by Iran. That has further shaken oil markets because of concerns that any conflict with Iran could disrupt oil shipments from the Gulf region.

"The prices would go unlimited," Badri said during the interview, referring to the effect of a military conflict. "I can't give you a number."

Analysts said the timing of Badri's remarks was noteworthy, given that the idea of an attack on Iran has been around for years. In addition, an attack on Iran would probably not specifically target oil facilities, said Johannes Benigni, managing director of JBC, an oil research and consulting firm in Vienna.

"Perhaps OPEC wants to say to the Americans in particular that there would be an economic price to be paid for an attack on Iran," said Daniel Gros, director of the Center for European Policy Studies in Brussels. "Gulf leaders also know that if a war broke out, the situation of some Gulf states also would become more uncomfortable and could have political difficulties for them domestically," he said, noting that some have their own Shia minorities.

Badri, a former oil executive who has headed the oil industry in Libya and also served as deputy prime minister of that country, called for a peaceful solution. He also suggested that an additional military conflict in the Middle East, besides the ongoing conflict in Iraq, would be severe and long-lasting.

"If something happened there, nobody would be able to solve it," he said.

The United States, Israel and other Western countries say Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons, but Iran says the program is only for civilian purposes.

Badri said that current geopolitical tensions were among the principal reasons why oil prices were so high.

He said that a shortfall in refining capacity and a weak dollar were other factors, and he reiterated OPEC's position that speculation on oil markets probably was the most important.

But he said that reserves of oil were plentiful and that worries about scarcity were misplaced.

Proven reserves of conventional oil worldwide rose slightly to about 1.205 trillion barrels in 2007 from 1.195 trillion barrels in 2006, according to one of two annual reports issued by OPEC on Thursday.

Supplies from Russia and Norway and other nations outside the 13-member OPEC are expected to keep growing, helped by technologies like turning gas and coal into liquid fuel and extracting oil from tar sands and shale.

Even so, Badri sought to assuage concerns about a supply shock, saying that OPEC members already were investing $160 billion in new production capacity up to 2012.

But he said additional investment in future production capacity could be limited, potentially sharpening a dispute with consuming nations about whether sufficient steps are being taken to meet demand over the next decade.

The International Energy Agency, an energy monitor based in Paris and financed by industrialized nations, warned in its annual medium term report this month that oil supplies would remain tight over the next few years, despite the record-high prices. The IEA noted low spare capacity from OPEC, among other factors. It said that prices were high mostly because of fast-growing demand from rapidly industrializing countries like China, rather than because of market speculation.

On Tuesday, leaders of the Group of 8 economic powers warned that surging oil prices could be a key factor undermining world growth and called on petroleum suppliers to increase production and refining and to increase investment in oil exploration and output over the medium term.

Some analysts have predicted that oil prices could reach $200 a barrel this year as oil consumption continues to rise rapidly while supplies lag.

Saudi Arabia has said it would raise output in July. But OPEC has not officially increased output since a meeting last September. The next meeting of the group is in September. Badri said it was too early to say whether OPEC would raise output then.

OPEC also reported Thursday that economic growth in emerging markets would ensure that consumption worldwide increased annually by 1.3 million barrels a day to 92.3 million barrels by 2012, 102.2 million barrels by 2020, and 113 million barrels per day by 2030. The figure for 2030 represented a downward revision of the expected oil demand, by four million barrels a day, from the previous year's outlook.

OPEC officials said that improving recovery and production processes would continue to enable efficient recovery of hydrocarbons. But because of the diverse sources of liquid fuels coming from sources like natural gas and coal, total demand for crude oil pumped from wells would not exceed 82 million barrels a day by 2030.

Total withdrawing from Iran

Total, the French oil giant, has decided to back away from planned investments in Iran because of political uncertainty, a company official said Thursday, David Jolly reported from Paris.

Total's withdrawal from Iran, including a planned huge gas project in the South Pars field, makes it the last major Western oil company to give up on Iran amid pressure from Washington.

"We think that under current conditions it is not possible in Iran just now," Patricia Marie, a spokeswoman for Total, said.