US has plan to attack Iran if needed, military chief admits

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Guardian

US has plan to attack Iran if needed, military chief admits
Admiral Mike Mullen says there is a plan to prevent Tehran acquiring nuclear arms, but adds: 'I hope we don't get to that'
Ed Pilkington in New York guardian.co.uk,
Sunday 1 August 2010 18.37 BST

Barack Obama's main military adviser said today the US does have a plan to attack Iran should it become needed as a means of stopping the Tehran regime from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the country's highest ranking officer, was asked by Meet the Press on NBC whether the military had a plan to attack Iran. "We do," he replied.

Mullen's comment was a rare admission on the part of any senior figure in the US government that plans have been drawn up for possible military action against Iran. The normal wording of disclaimers from those within and around the Obama administration is that "all options remain on the table".

He fell far short of suggesting there was any appetite on the part of the US for taking on the leaders of Iran in open conflict. He said it was unacceptable for Iran to obtain nuclear weapons, but he said that equally he would be "extremely concerned" about the prospect of a military engagement.


Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/01/us-iran-attack-plan-mullen

[realisticphish]

1. well, yeah

is this really a surprise? I'm sure we have plans for attacking most other countries in the world. And I'm sure many, if not most, other countries have plans for attacking us.

[daleo]

15. Most counties' war plans don't mean much

Because they don't spend much on their militaries and they don't have (recent) histories of invading countries half way across the world. It is different with the U.S., so an American admiral's war talk really means something.

[saigon68]

40. Oh goody a REAL WAR

[babylonsister]

2. Of course they do; they'd be irresponsible if they didn't. nt

[Oregone]

3. See! Thats "Change"! Transparency

[L0oniX]

25. Changealicious indeed. n/t

[Ruby the Liberal]

4. Thats what the Pentagon does all day

Dream up war scenarios and draw up plans.

[L0oniX]

27. ...

[harun]

38. +1

[onethatcares]

5. all we need is to kill the economy further and allow the over 50 crowd

to invade. It'll probably take a little longer than usual and the geritol lines at the px will be longer but, invade we will. Or we'll start drafting those little tykes right out of kindergarden,give em a M4 and down the road they'll go.

Wudda you guys think of that idea?

Jeeeeeeeezzzzzzus, why the hell do we have to tell every country in the world they have to cowtow to us?

[napi21]

7. Oh come on. It would have been irresponsible of the Admiral to say

anything else. I watched that segment and I don't think he WANTS to invade anywhere, but his job is to make sure th miitary is prepared to do so if ordered.

[WheelWalker]

12. :-{)

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/cowtow.html

Blessings.

[bbinacan]

6. No shit.

Is this a surprise?

[sofa king]

17. Especially after five years of trying to implement that plan.

But the invasion of Iran was almost singlehandedly blocked by the procedural virtuosity of Sen. Byrd. Sen. Reid deserves a nod for that, too.

[Cleobulus]

8. The United States also has plans to attack Canada...

I doubt such plans will ever be implemented. The brass try to prepare for every eventuality.

[Posteritatis]

10. And vice versa until fairly recently

I don't think we've bothered to update ours in awhile, though. Of course, ours were based around the idea of suffering as expensive a defeat as possible as opposed to annexing the northern states or something. ;)

[Thor_MN]

44. Not sure about the Dakotas and west

but I'm pretty sure you would not have had much of a problem taking Minnesota and east during the Bush reign. Most of us would have been willing to be adopted. :)

[JohnyCanuck]

11. Yes, but here's the big difference,

Israel does not want the US to attack Canada, but it does fervently want US to attack Iran.

The Real Aim of Israel’s Bomb Iran Campaign

by Gareth Porter

Reuel Marc Gerecht's screed justifying an Israeli bombing attack on Iran coincides with the opening of the new Israel lobby campaign marked by the introduction of House Resolution 1553 expressing full support for such an Israeli attack.

What is important to understand about this campaign is that the aim of Gerecht and of the right-wing government of Benjamin Netanyahu is to support an attack by Israel so that the United States can be drawn into direct, full-scale war with Iran.

snip

In 2006-07, the Israeli war party had reason to believed that it could hijack U.S. policy long enough to get the war it wanted, because it had placed one of its most militant agents, David Wurmser, in a strategic position to influence that policy.

We now know that Wurmser, formerly a close adviser to Benjamin Netanyahu and during that period Vice President Dick Cheney's main adviser on the Middle East, urged a policy of overwhelming U.S. military force against Iran. After leaving the administration in 2007, Wurmser revealed that he had advocated a U.S. war on Iran, not to set back the nuclear program but to achieve regime change.

snip

The idea of waging a U.S. war of destruction against Iran is obvious lunacy, which is why U.S. military leaders have strongly resisted it both during the Bush and Obama administrations. But Gerecht makes it clear that Israel believes it can use its control of Congress to pound Obama into submission. Democrats in Congress, he boasts, "are mentally in a different galaxy than they were under President Bush." Even though Israel has increasingly been regarded around the world as a rogue state after its Gaza atrocities and the commando killings of unarmed civilians on board the Mavi Marmara, its grip on the U.S. Congress appears as strong as ever.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/07/30

[Knight Hawk]

20. Helicopter crash

The helicopter crash of an Israeli copter killing 6 Israelis in Rumania last week was during a training session in how to shoot missels into tunnels .This was n prepartion for rhe attack.IMHO unless Iran backs down big time it will happen.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

9. what about North Korea?

all the neocons can talk about is Iran oil Iran oil Iran oil...

[OnlinePoker]

14. North Korea actually has the bomb and a disciplined military

A scarier proposition than Iran which doesn't have the bomb and is not as well equipped a force as NK. Remember, too, the U.S. philosophy seems to be drop a crap load of bombs on them from a distance and hope you hit what you think is there. Didn't work to well when Bush went after Saddam and his sons the first night of Gulf War 2 and isn't going too well in Afghanistan and Pakistan with the drone strikes on civilian targets ongoing.

[Pavulon]

23. Saddam had a nice military in GW1

we left in the desert in kuwait, its still there. We have a plan to attack and invade canada. not a big revelation.

We dont paint schools for people in funny hats real well, we do destroy infrastructure and men in vast quantities. You know what our military was designed to do.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

33. Iran is supposed to be 8 years away from making a bomb

[OnlinePoker]

34. Exactly.

A preemptive strike against a non-nuclear power to stop them from acquiring the needed resources to build a bomb would be preferable to attacking a country that already has one. What Obama has to weigh is what the likely fallout from such an attack might be and decide if it's worth it. I guess the question that has to be asked...would you rather have Iran with a bomb or without it. 1 year or 8 years won't make a difference in the end once they've actually built one.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

37. regime change?

[Zhade]

39. That's PREVENTATIVE, *not* preemptive!

It's not the latter until there's an actual imminent military threat.

[OnlinePoker]

43. I stand corrected. n/t

[skoalyman]

13. how about the north poll

you know Santa and his terroristic elves:scared:

[yurbud]

16. ''if needed''? Their total military spending is about 0.5% of ours.

[MisterP]

18. imagine if Afghanistan were folded up, made even steeper, the size of Texas,

administered by a real government with some military and techno-industrial capacity, and with far, far fewer locals that have been bought off

and you have the Zagros

[KoKo]

19. Okay...Obama...More "GUNS OF AUGUST?"

Obama has a hard time fighting off the disinfo from the NEO-CONS with every "step he makes...every breath he takes"...the "Hardline Likkudists are "WATCHING YOU!...WATCHING YOU...WATCHING YOU...WATCHING YOU!"

What to do? Well call up Jimmy Carter and ask him. He's a very reasonable fellow...and has ties in that Community...and he will work with you and give reasoned ADVICE...if, "Mr. Obama" ...you are WILLING TO LISTEN!

[underpants]

21. They have a plan to attack Luxembourg for crying out loud

Australia and Iceland too

[rug]

22. Thank God somebody does.

[HEyHEY]

36. Hey, you're gonna get me in trouble for laughing at work!

[L0oniX]

28. Oh nonsense ...everyone knows that Liechtenstein is where Osama is.

[underpants]

29. We have a plan for that too

Frickin' Liechtenstein!! :mad:

[L0oniX]

24. ...

[proteus_lives]

26. So?

It's SOP.

Every country in the world has plans for fighting every other country.

[Alamuti Lotus]

30. Iran has plan to attack Israel if needed, military chief admits

Do you still have no objection to this premise?

[proteus_lives]

31. No I don't.

That's what the military is supposed to be doing.

Having plans for every scenario.

[JohnyCanuck]

32. Are We Replaying Iraq…In Iran?

“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” - George Orwell

Are We Replaying Iraq…In Iran?

snip

All of this is mighty strange. First of all, there is no supportable evidence that Iran is planning to build nuclear weapons. UN inspections and even US intelligence reports fail to support this conclusion. This being the case, why does Robert Gates speak as if a nuclear Iran is imminent? One possibility is that he and others in Washington are working from assumptions based on what the U.S. would do if it was in Iran’s shoes. To understand this better we can ask what Mr. Gates and President Obama would do if, magically transformed into Iran’s leaders, they were confronted with the following questions and answers?

* Who backed Saddam Hussein in his war on Iran? The United States.
* Who attacked Iraq and then blamed much of the resistance coming from Shia quarters on Iran? The United States.
* Who has virtually surrounded Iran with potentially hostile military bases? The United States.
* Who has very likely abetted violent terror attacks by some of Iran’s minority groups? The United States.
* Who now speaks of Iran in tones remarkably similar to those used for Iraq prior to invasion of that country? The United States.
* Who speaks almost daily of launching a military attack on Iran? America’s number one “ally” Israel.
* Who characterized Iran as one of the three “rogue” states making up the axis of evil? The United States.
* And finally, and perhaps most relevant to our present situation, which one of those three “rogue” states has not been invaded or threatened with attack by the United States? The one with the nuclear weapons (North Korea). The Defense Secretary does not have to be a genius to assume that, despite the lack of hard evidence, Iran might very well seek to be nuclear armed. Because that is almost certainly what Washington would do if it was in Tehran’s place.

At this point someone ought to stop and ask why the United States cares if Iran has one or two or three nuclear warheads for defensive purposes? In modern times Iran has never invaded or even attacked another country unless it was attacked first. The whole notion that Ahmadinejad wants to “wipe Israel off the map” is a Zionist propaganda story based on a mistranslated speech. It is on the same level as the neo-con tale about Iraqi soldiers throwing Kuwaiti infants out of incubators. Also, given the description above, the U.S. could easily help remove most of the fears that might be driving Iran in a nuclear direction. That is because those fears are mostly a function of American policies. Just a month or so ago Washington actually had an opportunity to lay this whole nuclear controversy to rest when Turkey and Brazil succeeded in negotiating third party enrichment for Iran’s nuclear fuel. Obama failed to pursue it. Instead, he has sent Robert Gates out to talk tough. To tell us that the “military option is back on the table.” Time Magazine also informs us that U.S. Army Central Command “which is in charge of organizing military operations in the Middle East” has “made real progress in planning targeted air strikes .” And, perhaps the scariest part of all this, “Israel has been brought in to the planning process.”

snip

And now they want us to attack Iran. Morton Klein the fanatical leader of the Zionist Organization of America wants you to believe that a nuclear Iran will give atomic weapons to terrorists. To avoid this Washington will be forced into an “unending series of concessions” amounting to “nuclear blackmail” (Philadelphia Inquirer July 17, 2010). There is not a shred of evidence for this assertion and a lot of evidence that suggests it is absolutely wrong. The Shia Iranians fear and dislike the Sunnis of Al Qaeda. They have cooperated with the U.S., even under the Bush administration, in the “war against terrorism.” And, they have their own terrorist problems that encourages them to continue to aid us in this regard. But, Mr. Klein and his Zionist cohort, are not interested in facts. They are interested in solidifying the fraying American alliance with Israel. Scare tactics serve their purpose, just as they did in the case of Iraq. And Obama seems to be going along with this fraudulent campaign.

http://mycatbirdseat.com/2010/07/are-we-replaying-iraq-in-iran/

[HEyHEY]

35. Uh, of course, you have plans to invade Canada if needed, and Canada you

[superconnected]

41. I would expect this if we pulled out of Iraq. The gov's been trying to go to war with Iran for a

while.

[lovuian]

42. move troops out of Iraq and into Iran

War with Iran is suicide