Easter Surprise: Attack on Iran, New 9/11… or Worse

[Pharaoh]

Easter Surprise: Attack on Iran, New 9/11… or Worse

By Heather Wokusch

“There’s an old saying in Tennessee — I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.” – George W. Bush, September 2002

“This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous… Having said that, all options are on the table.” – George W. Bush, February 2005

03/29/07 "ICH " -- -- The Bush administration continues moving closer to a nuclear attack on Iran, and we ignore the obvious buildup at our peril.
Russian media is sounding alarms. In February, ultra-nationalist leader Vladimir Shirinovsky warned that the US would launch a strike against Tehran at the end of this month. Then last week, the Russian News and Information Agency Novosti (RIA-Novosti) quoted military experts predicting the US will attack Iran on April 6th, Good Friday. According to RIA-Novosti, the imminent assault will target Iranian air and naval defense capabilities, armed forces headquarters as well as key economic assets and administration headquarters. Massive air strikes will be deployed, possibly tactical nuclear weapons as well, and the Bush administration will attempt to exploit the resulting chaos and political unrest by installing a pro-US government.

Sound familiar? It's Iraq Déjà vu all over again, and we know how well that war has gone.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17440.htm

[NightWatcher]

1. I've seen this story in a dozen different places since yesterday

..also remember that Congress will be on spring break next week, leaving the bush crime family froo to run around and plot whatever they choose.

..it also goes by the name "Operation Bite". As a quick aside, operations with an "active verb" in the title often mean that aggressive action will take place. Remember the buildup to Iraq 1- Desert Shield, then when we invaded, Desert Storm.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

2. Indeed.

A dozen different places have copied it from the Russian newspaper that reported it. I've come to the conclusion that the only thing that travels faster than light is bullshit, via the internet.

[BeHereNow]

7. Tell the Iranians trying to leave Iran it's bullshit.

And then pass me some of what you're smoking so I too,
can be oblivious to reality.

BHN

[seemslikeadream]

8. How about Robert Baer? Is a U.S.-Iran War Inevitable?

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1604546,00.html

You wouldn't be wrong to wonder if Iran hasn't lost its mind seizing the fifteen British marines and sailors, and in so doing, handing Bush a causus belli even he couldn't have imagined.


Feeling cornered in its nuclear confrontation, Tehran is trying to take the offensive against Britain. Will it backfire?
But then again you'd be missing the grim fatalism that has settled over Iran of late, the resigned belief that a war with the U.S. is all but inevitable. This week Iranian diplomats are telling interlocutors that, yes, they realize seizing the Brits could lead to a hot war. But, they point out, it wasn't Iran that started taking hostages — it was the U.S., when it arrested five members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in Erbil in Northern Iraq on January 11. They are diplomats, the Iranians insist. They were in Erbil with the approval of the Kurds and therefore, they argue, are under the protection of the Vienna Convention.

Iranian grievances, real and perceived, don't stop there. Tehran is convinced the U.S. or one of its allies was behind the March 2006 separatist violence in Iranian Baluchistan, which ended up with twenty people killed, including an IRGC member executed. And the Iranians believe there is more to come, accusing the U.S. of training and arming Iranian Kurds and Azeris to go back home and cause problems. Needless to say the Iranians are not happy there are American soldiers on two of its borders, as well as two carriers and a dozen warships in the Gulf. You call this paranoia, they ask.

The Bush Administration is doing nothing to allay Tehran's paranoia. With the largest build up in the Gulf since the start of this Iraq war, it's actually fanning it. You have to wonder if Bush is counting on the Iranians over-reacting like they did when they seized our embassy in 1979. And lest we forget, this was driven by paranoia that we were plotting to destroy the revolution.

[Hippo_Tron]

21. I smell a recess appointment

[joeybee12]

3. Who's the New Yorker writer who has been right all along

about what the scum in this administration have been up to? Anyway, I recall him on the Daily Show last year predicti9ng an April, 2007 attack on Iran--they've been planning this all along.

[NightWatcher]

6. Sy Hersh

[KittyWampus]

15. Hersch most certainly did NOT predict an April 07 attack. That is bullshit.

He predicted an attack last year and did not mention April 07.

[BeHereNow]

4. I don't doubt for a second that they will do it- who's going to stop them?

Iran has been the target and the plan since the conception of the PNAC.
They said so in black and white.
How any one could doubt they fully intend to bomb the shit
out of Iran hasn't done their homework.
BHN

[soothsayer]

5. Not ready to attack until april 17. tsunami on diego garcia set the

effort back (otherwise would have been ready on april 7). well that's the poop i've heard anyway. who knows!

[shanti]

9. it sure would take the heat off the hearings, now wouldn't it?

n/t

[blues90]

10. scott ritter is coming up on jeff farias right now on nova M

[NightWatcher]

11. thanks for the heads up

[NightWatcher]

13. sounds like Jeff has been reading the DU

[blues90]

14. yes it does , now comes the interesting part . asking about april 6th

[KittyWampus]

16. And Scott Ritter's prediction we'd attack Iran last year has already proved wrong.

[blues90]

18. Right now scott is still saying

It won;t be april 6th but could be just before or after and from now until june is a very dangerous time , he did say they are determined to attack Iran , they do not put in place this much effort for nothing and there becomes a point of no return .

[Dover]

12. Subverting Iran - Washington’s Covert War inside Iran

Subverting Iran
Washington’s Covert War inside Iran

Much attention has been given to the Bush Administration’s preparations for possible war against Iran as well as its drive to impose sanctions. Meanwhile, a less noticed policy has been unfolding, one that may in time prove to have grave consequences for the region. There is a covert war underway in Iran, still in its infancy, but with disturbing signs of impending escalation. In the shadowy world of guerrilla operations, the full extent of involvement by the Bush Administration has yet to be revealed, but enough is known to paint a disturbing picture.

The provision of aid to anti-government forces offers certain advantages to the Bush Administration. No effort needs to be expended in winning support for the policy. Operations can be conducted away from the public eye during a time of growing domestic opposition to the war in Iraq, and international opinion is simply irrelevant where the facts are not well known. In terms of expenditures, covert operations are a cost-effective means for destabilizing a nation, relative to waging war.

There is nothing new in the technique, and it has proven an effective means for toppling foreign governments in the past, as was the case with socialist Afghanistan and Nicaragua. In Yugoslavia, U.S. and British military training and arms shipments helped to build up the secessionist Kosovo Liberation Army from a small force of 300 soldiers into a sizable guerrilla army that made the province of Kosovo ungovernable. The very chaos that the West did so much to create was then used as the pretext for bombing Yugoslavia.

According to a former CIA official, funding for armed separatist groups operating in Iran is paid from the CIA’s classified budget. The aim, claims Fred Burton, an ex-State Department counter-terrorism agent, is “to supply and train” these groups “to destabilize the Iranian regime.” (1)...>

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=67&ItemID=12410

[HCE SuiGeneris]

17. Operation B I T E

Blow Iran To Eternity?

[chknltl]

19. BITE= b.ush i.s t.he e.nemy

Speaking of a blow to eternity....where's Monica Lewinsky when we so desperately need her.

[soothsayer]

25. Admiral Fallon is in charge of Operation TIRANT (supposedly

stands for The Iran Naval Theater). gawd they're childish.

[global1]

20. Does Anyone Besides Me Think The Capturing Of The Brit's Is An ....

insurance policy for the Iranians. It would be hard for anyone to attack Iran if the Iranians strategically place these 'hostages' at all of the critical sites around Iran that * might be targeting.

Could Tony Blair go along with *'s attack on Iran if he knew his countrymen/woman were put in harm's way and could/would be killed?

[chknltl]

22. I hope he does not do this...I do not think he will either.

Is bush a martyr? I do not think he thinks of himself this way. The notion that he "wants" to make aggression against Iraq has been forefront in the media worldwide for months now. Should he do so the world will be proven right, all of his detractors will be proven right, the Democrats who work to curb his ability to wage another war with Iraq WILL BE PROVEN RIGHT! His numbers are already in the shitter, protests calling for his impeachment are weekly in the news...

So how would all this change should he nuke Iraq for ANY reason??? There would be immediate massive protests in major cities throughout the world calling for his removal! There would be a tremendous escalation in protests in major cities here in America calling for his removal. There is a good chance that major embargoes would be put in place against America by those we count on for free trade. Gas and gold prices would skyrocket and the world wide stock exchanges would also quite likely show tremendous drops... and how much longer do you think he could hang on to his precious job in the face of all this. Sure they want Iraq's oil but how are they going to get it by nuking her?

I ask again...do you see bush and co as visualizing themselves as martyrs?????
I could be wrong...I hope not.

Let me add another simple perspective here: Was Saddam Hussein a martyr? What did he REALLY want. He wanted to remain a dictator of Iraq and to live as such for many many more years. Sure it would have been nice if the world would have chosen to cast it's gaze elsewhere but thanks to bushco that was not going to happen. So for the sake of argument let us GIVE Saddam a NUKE to do what ever he wanted to do with it just prior to our invasion 4 years ago. Now what in the hell COULD he have done with it.... Hit Tel Aviv?...New York?... London?...Given it to a "Terrorist" agency to wipe out the gays of San Fransisco???? If a Nuke were to actually go off ANYWHERE how many more minutes do you suppose Saddam Hussein would have left to breath as a living individual? That is right, the wrath of the entire world would have instantly been arrayed against him and his tiny corner of the world... truly his plan for a long life as a dictator would have been over in less than a week. Saddam was NOT a martyr...he knew this just as well as you know it. The absolute LAST thing Saddam wanted in his country was an offensive WMD for his personal use!!!!

I do not see bushco as martyers...I do not think they are going to Nuke ANYONE. Even if Osama Bin Laden nukes Iraq...bush would suffer dramatically because the world would think he did it. I argue that the very last thing that bushco wants right now is to see that can of worms opened up! If it does get opened, it will be a VERY VERY bad day for him indeed!

Just my oppinion.
c

[hedgehog]

23. Absolutely Bush sees himself as a martyr! Right now his fantasy is of retiring from the

presidency with very low polls, maybe even taking the bags up to the attic himself when he gets to be Crawford. That will make the acclaim all the sweeter when Democracy blooms in Iraq and spreads out all over the Middle East.

[chknltl]

24. martyrs don't retire...the get retired...PERMENATELY

and like Joan Of Arc, they do so to prove a point. saddam was a weasel...so is bush. Both have the same goal: Stay in power as long as possible and milk it for all it is worth. They both balanced this as best they could. Unfortunately for saddam, bushco removed his abilities to remain in power...he was soooo backed into a corner that there was NO escape for him. He could have allowed the weapons inspectors free range everywhere in his country but it would have changed nothing...he was doomed. He could have stepped down and STILL BEEN DOOMED! So did the doomed Saddam go out in a blaze of glory? Did he lead his troops in a final fanatical charge into history against the invading infidel? No he hid in a hole in the ground like the weasel he really was.

bush is a weasel too...he has surrounded himself with weasels. Look at karl rove...do you see anything but weasel there? How about bolton, cheney, rice, gonzalas even tony snow and his predecessors....weasels all. Maybe rumsfeld was made of sterner stuff, he frankly scared the hell out of me, he struck me as a fanatic who ACTUALLY believed in the horseshit he spewed daily! I refuse to believe that any of the rest of these characters actually believe the very rhetoric they spew to the masses. I do not think that they are willing to die for their beliefs. They are in it for the $$ and power and to make that ride last as long as possible for themselves and those who pull their strings. They are a corporation. The corporation as an entity seeks to grow, not die in a blaze of glory.

Well that's my opinion at any rate and i know opinions are like.... well you know. I could be wrong of course...I suppose a mushroom cloud over Tehran would be a hella smokin' gun here... I just hope that never happens...if it does then I'll be the first to admit that I have misjudged bush but frankly I just can not foresee him as the kind of person who is willing to go out in a blaze of glory... I see him as the kind of guy who wants to run away and hide like saddam did and like he did during the Viet Nam debacle. I also don't see the republican party as being willing to pull an Enron either.
c

[LSK]

26. here we go again

Glad we survived the attacks on 6/6/06 and the ones planned to "save the election".