Deja Vu All Over Iran

[RedEarth]

Comedians might be forgiven for making jokes that President Bush is talking about drawing down U.S. forces in Iraq because he needs them next door in Iran. It isn't, however, so far off the mark.

The pieces are falling into place for Operation Regime Change II, this time in Iran. You'd think, given how badly it went the first time, and how utterly unpredictable a showdown with Iran would be, that the Bush administration would have at least changed its m.o. - but no. Shaking his head in New York, where he was attending United Nations Security Council discussions on Iran, Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said bluntly: "It looks so déjà vu." He ridiculed the idea of sanctions on Iran as useless and ineffective, and he called the U.S. push for a showdown over Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program a "self-fulfilling prophecy."

He's right. Even John Bolton, the neoconservative saber-rattler who represents the United States at the U.N., agrees. Said Bolton, when asked about Lavrov's comment: "If that is déjà vu, then so be it, but that is the course we are on in an effort to get Iran to reverse its decision to acquire nuclear weapons."

So let's look precisely at what course that is. In the past few weeks, we've seen the Bush administration create a brand-new Office of Iranian Affairs at the State Department, which looks suspiciously like a step toward creating the Iraq war planning office at the Pentagon called the Office of Special Plans. No word yet on whether the Department of Defense plans to create a parallel Office of Iranian Affairs, but it can't be far behind. So that's déjà vu, for sure.

The United States is pressing the U.N. to sanction Iran, to be more aggressive in shutting down a nuclear program that, so far at least, the International Atomic Energy Agency has not been able to find, exactly. Even the least charitable among us might forgive the U.N.'s diplomats, including Lavrov, for being suspicious of the Bush administration when it pledges to take Iran to the U.N. Security Council and to abide by the result. In 2002, the Bush administration took Iraq to the UNSC, got the IAEA inspectors invited back in, began pressing for further U.N. action-and then gave up the whole thing and invaded Iraq unilaterally. So that, for sure, sounds like déjà vu.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/031406B.shtml

[Selatius]

1. Bush is insane. Where are we gonna get the troops to occupy Iran?

Iran is THREE TIMES the size of Iraq BOTH in POPULATION and SIZE. You've got the Zagros Mountains running up the middle of that country and high foothills around that ridge, and that's excellent for guerrilla warfare. The Iranians don't like their own government, but they like the thought of an invading foreign army even less. They will fight because they would see it as a struggle of national independence against foreign domination.

If Bush would stop picking away at Iran, then in due time the Iranians themselves will overthrow their own government in Tehran, but if we put even one foot on Iranian soil, they will attack us in the end instead of the dictatorial mullahs who have oppressed them for so long.

The only way you could hold such a piece of land that large with that many people on it is if you had several million soldiers, and you can't get that unless you start the draft lottery again.

[mom cat]

2. The only way to do it without many troops is some Kooky plan to do

it all by air: massive airial bombardment with or without nukes.I am sure that the Pentagon is selling it as a piece of cake and promicing that the "Mission will be accomplished" by time for the elections. At least they will say that by election time that "we are on our way to winning. They will destroy ans destabilize Iran too and probably use enough nuclear material to cripple life for a long time, or make parts of the country uninhabitable.

[Selatius]

3. An air campaign is what I'm fearing most at this point.

We would do to Iran what we did to Iraq throughout the 1990s. The air campaign would probably resemble the opening phases of the 1991 Gulf War. Thousands of missions would be flown in several weeks, and by the time its over, Iran would be incapable of defending itself against US air power. We could bomb them with impunity, and the people on the ground could do nothing except die.

What I fear above all that is China or Russia throwing a fit of rage, since China buys a lot of oil from Iran and Russia sells a lot of military goods to Iran.

[mom cat]

5. Way too true. The US has also been increasing its air strikes in Iraq

and the civilian casualties have continued to rise. It is wholesale slaughter.

[george_hurley]

4. ***PETITION TO SIGN: NO WAR WITH IRAN ***

Hello,

For the past year, the growing tensions mounting between the US, Israel, and Iran are reaching a point where military action against Iran is w/in months of becoming reality. The repercussions are terrifying as such military action could involve countries such as China and Russia as they share massive energy/economic interests w/ Iran. The most likely scenario we would face would be the collapse of the US economy as the combination of a massive rise in oil prices and a run on the US dollar would surely be the weapon many countries would use to fight back against a preemptive US or Israeli strike.

For a collection of articles and resources on this subject you can visit this link: http://reseaudesign.com/research/iran/iran_summery.html

I'm starting up a petition which I will be sending out to as many members of Congress as possible. I'm asking for help to get this signed by as many people, possible in the next month. Send it to as many people you can.

http://www.petitiononline.com/n0war1rn /



Also, here is another petition you can sign from another group:
http://stopwaroniran.org/statement.shtml




Thanks for your time