PDA

View Full Version : Countdown to Armageddon in Persia



Nbadan
08-30-2007, 04:46 PM
Loose lips are saying the war in On after Labor Day....

Tick-Tock, Tick-Tock: Countdown to Midnight in Persia
Written by Chris Floyd
Thursday, 30 August 2007


Day after day, almost hour by hour, fresh confirmation comes of the impending American attack on Iran. Yet the same surreal malaise that hung over public affairs before the war of aggression against Iraq has descended again. Everyone knows the war is coming and nothing will stop it, but the strange, ludicrous shadow play of sham "debate" goes on, as if there were some kind of political or diplomatic maneuver out there that could deflect the Bush-Cheney junta from its long-chosen course. But nothing will stop them, just as nothing -- not even 10 million people in the streets around the world, the largest protest in human history -- stopped them from the rape of Iraq. It's what they want to do -- and they will do it.

The latest confirmation arrives from Juan Cole's new spin-off blog, "Global Affairs," where Barnett Rubin writes:

Today I received a message from a friend who has excellent connections in Washington and whose information has often been prescient. According to this report, as in 2002, the rollout will start after Labor Day, with a big kickoff on September 11. My friend had spoken to someone in one of the leading neo-conservative institutions. He summarized what he was told this way:

They have "instructions" (yes, that was the word used) from the Office of the Vice-President to roll out a campaign for war with Iran in the week after Labor Day; it will be coordinated with the American Enterprise Institute, the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, Commentary, Fox, and the usual suspects. It will be heavy sustained assault on the airwaves, designed to knock public sentiment into a position from which a war can be maintained. Evidently they don't think they'll ever get majority support for this -- they want something like 35-40 percent support, which in their book is "plenty."

Of course I cannot verify this report. But besides all the other pieces of information about this circulating, I heard last week from a former U.S. government contractor. According to this friend, someone in the Department of Defense called, asking for cost estimates for a model for reconstruction in Asia. The former contractor finally concluded that the model was intended for Iran. This anecdote is also inconclusive, but it is consistent with the depth of planning that went into the reconstruction effort in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I have no inside connections anywhere, but I do have a couple of friends who do. And one of them reported last week that one of his friends -- with good sources among the Establishment, including the White House -- also confirms that the attack on Iran is a done deal, "just a matter of time." Awaiting, no doubt, that post-Labor Day "rollout of product."

Cole also points us to the story by Larisa Alexandrovna and Muriel Kane, who reported on the study by two respected British academics on the likely course of the coming war. According to Dr. Dan Plesch, Director of the Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy of the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) at the University of London, and Martin Butcher, former Director of the British American Security Information Council, the war preparations now being made by the Bush Administration bespeak something far beyond a quick punitive strike on Iranian Guards positions or lightning raid on Iran's nuclear power facilities. Instead, what the Bush-Cheney junta envision is the complete destruction of the Iranian state in an aerial blitzkrieg aimed at up to 10,000 targets inside Iran.

The goal, says Plesch and Butcher, is to:

"destroy Iran's WMD , nuclear energy, regime, armed forces, state apparatus and economic infrastructure within days if not hours of President George W. Bush giving the order...Any attack is likely to be on a massive multi-front scale but avoiding a ground invasion. Attacks focused on WMD facilities would leave Iran too many retaliatory options, leave President Bush open to the charge of using too little force and leave the regime intact. US bombers and long range missiles are ready today to destroy 10,000 targets in Iran in a few hours. US ground, air and marine forces already in the Gulf, Iraq, and Afghanistan can devastate Iranian forces, the regime and the state at short notice.

Some form of low level US and possibly UK military action as well as armed popular resistance appear underway inside the Iranian provinces or ethnic areas of the Azeri, Balujistan, Kurdistan and Khuzestan. Iran was unable to prevent sabotage of its offshore-to-shore crude oil pipelines in 2005.


The assault will most likely be made with conventional weapons, the authors say, as the political and environmental effects of a nuclear strike on Iran would not be worth the limited military value of such an attack. After all, the Bushists want to control Iran and milk it dry after they destroy the regime and slaughter a vast number of innocent people. Halliburton and Exxon wouldn't be able to move right in and start gobbling up loot in a radiated land.

This is what is coming. This is what the Bushists will be selling to us soon. (Glenn Greenwald has a useful roundup of the growing madness here.) One sees comments here and there to the effect that "the American people will never accept this," that "Bush can't get away with this kind of thing after Iraq," or that "this isn't 2002, with everyone still raw and dazed after 9/11," etc., etc. But such declarations are pipe-dreams, foolish hopes. As we have pointed out here many times, Bush and Cheney are not interested in obtaining the "consent of the governed" for their militarist agenda -- nor do they need it.

Congress has already given its overwhelming approval to the specious reasons for war that Bush and his minions have advanced. The corporate media is doing its part again too; for example, the media's flagship, the New York Times, has been "stovepiping" warmongering spin straight from the White House and Pentagon onto its front pages -- exactly as it did in the run-up to the Iraq invasion, and even using the same reporter, Michael Gordon, who with his co-writer Judith Miller was reponsible for the dissemination of so many useful lies. The same system that fed the engines of aggressive war in 2002-03 -- reporter gets spin from Bushists, paper prints spin, Bushists then cite the report as "confirmation" of the lies they themselves concocted -- is in operation now.

Unless the Bushists institute a draft, it is inconceivable that any kind of mass protest movement strong enough to derail the coming war will arise from among the somnolent American people. The majority of Americans will grudgingly accept the war -- if they do not openly support it -- as long as it does not directly and immediately affect them. Only a ground invasion, with conscript troops, would spread the direct pain throughout American society. That's why the aggression will be based on air and naval power (along with the secret armies and death squads and mercenaries of America's covert forces.) The destruction of countless thousands of innocent people -- and the vital infrastructure to support the lives of millions more -- will simply be a dazzling light show on the nation's TV screens, complete with glitzy graphics and dramatic music.

But let us bear witness to the truth while we can still speak the truth: this is murder. And all those who do not speak out against it -- and against all those in high places who do nothing to stop it -- are fully complicit in this abomination. No excuses, no mitigation, not this time. Speak out -- or be damned with the criminals who thrive on your silence. ***


Recommend this article...

Chris Floyd (http://www.chris-floyd.com/content/view/1270/135)

clambake
08-30-2007, 05:43 PM
wait a minute, dan. you said a guy said that dick would resign within 3 weeks. are you saying that we'll attack Iran and dick will then leave?

inconvertible
08-30-2007, 06:43 PM
desperate for that oil, huh?

and the end of the world came and went in 1996(along with haley's comet)

Nbadan
08-31-2007, 12:03 AM
wait a minute, dan. you said a guy said that dick would resign within 3 weeks. are you saying that we'll attack Iran and dick will then leave?

Given the landsliding situation of our economy, I would bet on a attack on Iran rather than Dick cheney stepping aside, but if we did attack Iran, there is no going back to this equilibrium point, whether Dick steps aside or not....remember that all these things happening could or could not be mutually exclusive...we don't know yet.....and besides, I was just relaying someone else's prediction about Cheney...

Nbadan
08-31-2007, 12:35 AM
I recommend that as soon as you have free time, everyone should read this study....

Considering a War With Iran: A discussion paper on WMD in the Middle East (http://www.rawstory.com/images/other/IranStudy082807a.pdf)

Nbadan
08-31-2007, 01:19 AM
Meanwhile...here is a new IAEA report that Iran is cooperating in the agency's nuclear investigation and the IAEA is ready to conclude that Iran's nuclear enrichment capabilities are being used for the intended purpose of generating electricity, just as they have claimed, and not for generating uranium for bombs as the WH has claimed...

IAEA: Iran Cooperating In Nuclear Investigation
By John Ward Anderson and Joby Warrick
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, August 31, 2007; Page A10


PARIS, Aug. 30 -- The United Nations nuclear watchdog agency gave an upbeat assessment of Iranian cooperation with international inspectors in a new report Thursday that could make it more difficult for the United States to win tougher U.N. sanctions against Iran.

The report by the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna also concluded that while Iran continues to enrich uranium in violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions, its fuel enrichment plant has produced "well below the expected quantity for a facility of this design." The quality of the uranium also was lower than expected, the IAEA said.

<snip>

Iran claims that its nuclear program is entirely peaceful and intended to generate electricity, while the United States and numerous other Western countries contend it is secretly aimed at developing nuclear weapons. The report suggests that if Iran adheres to the program and timelines, the agency could resolve its remaining questions about the nature of the country's nuclear program by the end of the year and close the file.

"For the first time in a couple of years, we have been able to agree with the Iranians on a working arrangement, on how to resolve the outstanding issues," the U.N. agency's deputy director, Olli Heinonen, told reporters in Vienna. "What Iran is now facing is actually a litmus test" on whether it will deliver what it has promised, because its failure to do so in the past triggered Security Council action, Heinonen said.

If the IAEA concludes that Iran has not engaged in a covert program to develop nuclear weapons, it could raise new questions about the quality of U.S. intelligence in the Middle East. The United States made the case for going to war against Iraq based on claims that Saddam Hussein had programs to develop nuclear technologies and other weapons of mass destruction, but U.S. forces found no evidence of such programs after invading the country.

Longtime observers of Iran's program were struck by the report's revelations of slow progress of uranium enrichment. Iran appears to be running well behind its own self-imposed schedule for building new centrifuge machines, and its existing machines are operating well below capacity.

Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/30/AR2007083000460.html?hpid=sec-world)

Nbadan
08-31-2007, 01:49 AM
Meet the "Whack Iran" Lobby
Exiles peddling shaky intelligence, advocacy groups pressing for regime change, neocons bent on remaking the Middle East. Sound familiar?
Daniel Schulman
October 06 , 2006


Exiles peddling back-channel intelligence, upstart advocacy groups pressing for regime change, administration hawks intent on remaking the Middle East—the scene in Washington is looking eerily familiar as the Iran standoff grows more tense. Instead of Ahmad Chalabi, we have the likes of Iran-Contra arms-dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar. A new Iran directorate inside the Pentagon features some of the same people who brought you the Iraq intel-cherrypicking operation at the Office of Special Plans. Whether calling for outright regime change or pushing “democracy promotion” initiatives to undermine the Iranian government, an expanding cast of characters has emerged to promote confrontation between the U.S. and Iran. What follows is an abridged list of the individuals and organizations agitating to bring down the mullahs.

Abram Shulsky

An acolyte of political philosopher Leo Strauss, one of the intellectual forbears of the neoconservative movement and an advocate of the “noble lie,”—the notion that deception is morally acceptable when used by a wise, but misunderstood elite--Shulsky headed the Pentagon’s Office of Special Plans, which trafficked in faulty intelligence on Iraq (including information from Ahmad Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress) and circumvented the CIA to “stovepipe” WMD intelligence directly to the White House. As Laura Rozen reported in the Los Angeles Times in May, Shulsky, along with two former OSP staffers, John Trigilio and Ladan Archin, is now involved with the Pentagon’s Iran directorate. Already there are fears that the office has become a conduit for Iranian expatriate and one-time arms dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar, an Iran-Contra figure whom the CIA deemed a fabricator as far back as 1984. In a 1999 paper called “Leo Strauss and the World of Intelligence,” co-authored with the American Enterprise Institute’s Gary Schmitt, Shulsky writes that “Strauss's view certainly alerts one to the possibility that political life may be closely linked to deception. Indeed, it suggests that deception is the norm in political life, and the hope, to say nothing of the expectation, of establishing a politics that can dispense with it is the exception.”

Elizabeth Cheney

The vice president’s eldest daughter’s official title is Vice Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs; in that capacity, Cheney, until her maternity leave earlier this year, oversaw the State Department’s Iran-Syria Operations Group, whose mission is to aggressively push democracy promotion campaigns. Sometimes referred to as the agency’s “democracy czar,” Cheney had no Middle East assignments before being appointed to her current post, which involves launching a $85 million democracy promotion/propaganda campaign targeting Iran. At Foggy Bottom, she “has not shied away from throwing her weight around,” according to the American Prospect, and has been said to operate a “shadow Middle East policy.” She rarely speaks publicly or grants interviews; in an appearance at the Foreign Policy Association in 2005, she called Iran “the world’s leading sponsor of terror. No word on when and in what capacity Cheney will return from her leave.

David Wurmser

Long before being recruited to the Pentagon from the American Enterprise Institute following September 11, Wurmser was one of the loudest voices calling for Saddam Hussein's ouster. During the 1990s he co-authored a strategy paper—intended as advice to then-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—with a string of neoconservatives including Douglas Feith, Richard Perle, and his wife, Meyrav, a Middle East policy wonk at the Hudson Institute. It suggested “removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq... as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions” and advancing Israel's. As Mother Jones reported, Wurmser was also the “founding participant of the unnamed, secret intelligence unit at the Pentagon, set up in Feith's office, which would be the nucleus of the Defense Department's Iraq disinformation campaign that was established within weeks of the attacks in New York and Washington.” He served as an assistant to John Bolton at the State Department before becoming one of the Vice President's Middle East advisors. Less than two weeks after September 11, Wurmser described discontent within Iran as “a strategic opportunity” for the U.S.

Elliott Abrams

Since his return to public service after pleading guilty to two misdemeanor counts for withholding information from Congress as it probed the Iran-Contra scandal (he was later pardoned by President George H. W. Bush), Abrams has been a key player in shaping the Bush administration’s Middle East agenda. In 2005, he was tapped as deputy national security adviser and is now responsible for pushing the administration’s reform agenda in the Middle East. A founding member of the neocon think tank Project for the New American Century, Abrams joined Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeldin signing a 1998 letter to Bill Clinton urging regime change in Iraq. Abrams has written that “our military strength and willingness to use it will remain a key factor in our ability to promote peace.”

Mother Jones (http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/2006/09/iran.html)

Nbadan
08-31-2007, 01:55 AM
The list of characters goes on, with many of the same-type of pro-war propenents, if not the same people altogether, and even a Iran Study Group kinda like the Iraqi Office of Special Plans, a outfit set up by the office of the VP to stove-pipe pro-war propaganda to the office of the President before the war....

Pentagon confirms Iran Directorate
(...)


Military and non-military intelligence sources have also raised worries over what some describe to as “the Iran group” and others as “the Iran working group” and still others as a “cabal” operating out of the Pentagon.

A recent article by Laura Rozen for the Los Angeles Times revealed the Pentagon has created yet another Office of Special Plans-type body called the Directorate for Iran, or the Iranian Directorate.

“The Pentagon's directorate began with six full-time staff members," Rozen reported. "But they can draw on expertise throughout the government, providing access to potentially hundreds of specialists."

The notorious Office of Special Plans – which focused on Iraq -- is now believed by most experts to have provided a secondary conduit of cherry-picked intelligence on Iraq to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the White House. (More here)

aka "Iran Steering Group"?
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Pentagon’s Iran Directorate: ‘US broadcasts into Iran aren’t tough enough’


(...)

The Pentagon’s Iran Directorate, created in March 2006, “has drafted a report charging that US international broadcasts into Iran aren't tough enough on the Islamic regime,” further indication that some in the Bush administration are pushing for a more confrontational policy toward Iran. According to McClatchy Newspapers, which obtained a copy of the report this week, “the report appears to be a gambit by some officials in Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's office and elsewhere to gain sway over television and radio broadcasts into Iran, one of the few direct tools the United States has to reach the Iranian people.”

The report was written by Ladan Archin, a regime change proponent who formerly studied with Paul Wolfowitz when he was dean of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. Archin now serves as the Country Director in the Near East and South Asia Department of the Department of Defense responsible for Iran. The report was prepared for an inter-agency committee on policy toward Iran called the Iran Steering Group, which is co-chaired by the National Security Council and the State Department.

Iran Nuclear Watch (http://irannuclearwatch.blogspot.com/2006/09/pentagons-iran-directorate-us.html)

Nbadan
08-31-2007, 02:00 AM
Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Barry Venable declined to name the acting director of the new Iran office and would say only that the appointee was a "career civil servant." Among those staffing or advising the Iranian directorate are three veterans of the Office of Special Plans: Abram N. Shulsky, its former director; John Trigilio, a Defense Intelligence Agency analyst; and Ladan Archin, an Iran specialist.

Information Clearing House (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13111.htm)

Looks like Congress' Democrats should do some preemptive investigating before another treasonous act is perpetrated by the DOD and the Executive branch of incompetents.