US embassy cables: Gates warns of war with Iran

[Turborama]

Source: The Guardian

Summary:

In a meeting in Rome with the Italian foreign minister, US defence secretary, Robert Gates, warns that something must happen soon to break the Iran nuclear stalemate if another war in the Middle East is to be avoided. If Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it will be a different world in five years' time, Gates says. Key passage highlighted in yellow (Full cable at the link)...



Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/248624

---

Fear of 'different world' if Iran gets nuclear weapons
Embassy cables reveal how US relentlessly cajoles and bullies governments not to give succour to Tehran

Simon Tisdall
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 28 November 2010 18.16 GMT

Sitting in the Rome office of Franco Frattini, the Italian foreign minister, in February this year, Robert Gates, the veteran US defence secretary and former CIA chief, issued a chilling warning of war in our time. "Without progress in the next few months, we risk nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, war prompted by an Israeli strike, or both," Gates said. If Iran were allowed to develop a nuclear weapon, he added, the US and its allies would face "a different world" in four to five years.

As thousands of leaked state department cables show, Gates's visit was part of a tireless, round-the-clock offensive by US government officials, politicians, diplomats and military officers to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions and roll back its advance across the Middle East.

Ringed by professional "Iran watchers" based in neighbouring countries, besieged by electronic, cyber and human intelligence gathering and surveillance, squeezed by sanctions, bans and prohibitions, destabilised by unacknowledged internal covert action programmes, and isolated by myriad diplomatic and political means, Iran is the most scrutinised, interrogated country on earth.

But as the cables also show, Iran is fighting back. From Iraq to Afghanistan and from Azerbaijan to the Gulf, the battle between the US and Iran for the upper hand in the Middle East is, as one regional diplomat put it, "the great hegemonic contest of modern times".

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/28/united-states-iran-nuclear-weapons

[gateley]

1. I'm torn by this. On one hand I DO understand the need for

confidentiality and diplomacy, on the other, I'm fascinated and hope this points a big fat finger at Bushco's nefarious treachery.

[Posteritatis]

2. Feel pretty much the same way here

To say nothing of an historian's curiosity about the documents going back to the sixties.

[gateley]

4. I don't consider myself an historian, but I will be riveted nonetheless. nt

[Imajika]

5. How is this going to point the finger at Bush?

Lots of these cables are from the Obama administration, including many of these related to Iran.

The Obama administration has been desperately trying to stop Iran from getting a nuke, and in this very article there are cables released from Obama administration diplomats discussing this very thing.

Also, while Gates was Bush's Defense Secretary, he is also Obama's. Anything embarrassing Gates may have said, regardless of when, will hurt Obama just as much or more than Bush.

[bananas]

25. CBS confirms 2006 Raw Story scoop: Plame's job was to keep nukes from Iran

CBS confirms 2006 Raw Story scoop: Plame's job was to keep nukes from Iran
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2096028

Also see the other links I just posted in LBN:
Iran 'lied to UN inspectors about Qom nuclear site'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4632686

[AndyTiedye]

28. So Can We Put Cheney On Trial Yet?

CBS confirms 2006 Raw Story scoop: Plame's job was to keep nukes from Iran

When does Cheney's trial start then?

[Township75]

23. What does Bush have to do with this? His name doesn't even show up in the article.

Why are you hoping this points to Bush...you/we are going to benefit how from that should it occur?

[Zorro]

3. The world has just become a much more dangerous place

The Wikileaks release has not served the interests of international peace.

[Imajika]

6. Indeed...

It is extremely sad watching so many here applaud this.

Not only does it damage a Democratic President we all worked so hard to elect, it will set back US diplomatic efforts at an extremely critical time.

It is disheartening watching a forum which presumably supports President Obama cheer so loudly at actions which will severely embarrass and hurt his administration.

[lepus]

8. Cmon, agents Zorro and Imajika

Sunshine is a great disinfectant. The Obama administration, or for that matter any administration, have no rights to make deals in secret behind our backs.

This is the same shit that got us funding, with our taxes, priest killing,nun raping monsters, with a president not recalling anything about it.

It is always a critical time. No matter when. We have as a nation been at continuous war for a very long time.

Time to divest ourselves of empire and let world peace break out.

[Imajika]

21. Oh stop babbling about empire...

This isn't going to have any impact on "American empire" at all. It's only going to cost us more money to harden security, make information even HARDER to get in the public domain in the future, damage US relations with other nations in the near term, and hurt the Obama administration.

All this blather about how it is going to put a dent in the "American empire" is just plain silly.

Diplomats might now be more reluctant to give our elected leaders the straight scoop for fear it be released to the public, so internal discussion and deliberation will be locked down in even more secrecy than they are now.

This release will not have any positive effect at all, except I guess will allow those who think America is some great evil in the world a chance to celebrate over a temporary bloody nose to the US.

What this most hurts is President Obama's foreign policy and diplomatic efforts. This is a forum that, in theory at least, supports Democrats and President Obama - and yet here we have perhaps a majority of posters approving of something that damages our President and does nothing at all in the longterm to reduce "American empire".

[coalition_unwilling]

30. It disheartened me watching a former professor of constitutional law (Obama) say

that there would be no war crimes prosecutions for anyone in the Bush Junta.

You presume too much. I did support Obama -- held a sign for him and donated $$ -- but now that he has derogated to himself the right to decide when a U.S. citizen abroad may be executed extra-judicially, not so much.

Here's a suggestion: want to restore credibility to U.S. diplomatic efforts? Put high-ranking members of the Bush Junta -- up to and including Bush and Cheney -- on trial for war crimes. It's really pretty simple. Entire civilized world knows Bush Junta committed major war crimes in Iraq and AfPak and entire civilized world sees Obama doing absolutely nothing about it. Figure it out.

Edited for typo.

[ShamelessHussy]

7. just your perception, since this is the reality you were denied

hopefully now people will have a greater say, and these resource wars can end.

[jaxx]

10. What people would those be?

[ShamelessHussy]

11. weTHEpeople

[jaxx]

12. We are going to bypass the legislative branch and make policy?

How would that be accomplished?

[ShamelessHussy]

13. influence policy

it has happened many times before in history, when the people collectively speak out.



fyi

[jaxx]

14. What and who are you going to influence?

Iran? North Korea? The countries who would like nothing better than to take us down? John McCain, Kyl, Boehner, McConnell? All those who's interest lies in themselves and to hell with the country?

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

18. So try to influence Sen. Kyl 202-224-4521 Tell him your tired

of this crap! Unload on him, call him a traitor, Tell him you want the START treaty, at the very least it might feel good, if only for a moment. Tie up the phones, fight back dammit.

[MrsCorleone]

26. Them Iranian evildoers must be taken out. Whoooooooo hoooooooo. Shock 'n' Awe!!

Part 1:  Jason Jones meets a journalist, interviews people on the street, and visits an Iranian family to find out why Iran is so evil.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-june-17-2009/jason-jones--behind-the-veil---minarets-of-menace

Part 2: Jason Jones spoke with three alleged threats before the Iranian government arrested them. 
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-june-22-2009/jason-jones--behind-the-veil---persians-of-interest

Part 3: Jason Jones plays "Jihad Walking" in Iran and America to find out which country knows more about the other. 
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-23-2009/jason-jones--behind-the-veil---ayatollah-you-so

Part 4: Jason Jones immerses himself in Iran's youth culture by playing football with kids and teaching underground rapper Hichkas about hip hop. 
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-june-25-2009/jason-jones--behind-the-veil---the-kids-are-allah-right

[Zorro]

27. Keep yukking it up. The likelihood of an attack on Iranian nuke sites just went up.

Won't that be a hilarious turn of events for the Wikileaks cheerleaders?

[MrsCorleone]

31. Perhaps, I should have added the:

:sarcasm:

Jason Jones' Behind the Veil series exposes the Iranians for the savages :sarcasm: that they are, making it "okay" in the minds of Amerikans to "bomb, bomb, bomb..bomb... bomb bomb Iran, a'la McCain style.

Seriously, these videos serve as a pretty powerful eye opener for those with the breathtakingly ignorant view that the Persian people are a bunch violent, back wards war mongers.

Edit: add :sarcasm:

[The abyss]

16. Well called! Thank you.

Yes - "We the people, in order to form a more perfect union..."

If the wikileaks material is to do anything it is my hope that it will enrage the American people enough to make this once again a government of the people and by the people.

[andym]

9. Agreed. This leaked information will promote war and make peace more difficult

This information will cause problems with many "allies" like Pakistan. For example, it is now going to be extremely difficult to remove the research reactor that was considered insecure, due to public outcry in Pakistan that the USA is taking away Pakistan's nuclear weapons....
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?src=me

"A dangerous standoff with Pakistan over nuclear fuel: Since 2007, the United States has mounted a highly secret effort, so far unsuccessful, to remove from a Pakistani research reactor highly enriched uranium that American officials fear could be diverted for use in an illicit nuclear device. In May 2009, Ambassador Anne W. Patterson reported that Pakistan was refusing to schedule a visit by American technical experts because, as a Pakistani official said, “if the local media got word of the fuel removal, ‘they certainly would portray it as the United States taking Pakistan’s nuclear weapons,’ he argued.”

At least in this case nuclear disarmament will now not occur.

[OregonBlue]

17. I fear this is just one instance of the damage that will be done. I don't see how anything good will

come of this. Quite the opposite, I fear that our credibility around the world and especially in the middle-east will be damaged. These nuclear issues are serious and this is gonna be very, very bad.

[renate]

20. yeah. I'm okay with the need for secrecy, for some things

Not for things like the members of Cheney's energy advisory board, because secrecy was specifically not in the service of the nation, only the oligarchy.

However, when it comes to national security, there's very often--not always, as we learned from the march to war in Iraq--a real need for secrecy, not so much to keep information from the law-abiding members of the U.S. population but from those who would do us harm.

Admittedly, I haven't read much about what's supposed to be in the Wikileaks documents, so maybe trying to keep them secret was 100% uncool. But surely there are top top secret things in there that we don't want Iran or North Korea to know about, and I don't take it personally that my government isn't keeping me in the loop about them.

[Fruittree]

15. Do you or does anyone know what the person who leaks these

documents motivation is? I don't quite understand nor do I understand how he gets hold of them..

[Pavulon]

19. He dumped them for lulz and because hi disliked the army. you can google bradley manning and

boingboing to read his motivations first hand.

[krabigirl]

22. Hey, if they have "nothing to hide" then they have nothing to fear. Isn't that what they tell us?

lmao...

[Zorro]

32. If you have "nothing to hide"

then post your SSN and mother's maiden name.

[ThomThom]

24. The world was dangerous, we just didn't know what was going on

now we do. Our knowledge really changes nothing.

[lovuian]

29. so we are talking WWIII

we are going to use the WMD excuse again

[Nihil]

33. Hey, it worked so well last time ...

... so, considering that nobody in the current administration cares
about war crimes or irrelevent trivia like international treaties
and also that the American public at large are no more educated or
rational than ten years ago, just *why* should they change a game-plan
with such a "good" record?