Will Iran be next?

Joined: 1:46 AM - Nov 26, 2005

10:07 PM - Jan 15, 2007 #1

Kuwait media: U.S. military strike on Iran seen by April
www.chinaview.cn 2007-01-14 15:19:28

Special report: Iran Nuclear Crisis

    KUWAIT CITY, Jan. 14 (Xinhua) -- U.S. might launch a military strike on Iran before April 2007, Kuwait-based daily Arab Times released on Sunday said in a report.

    The report, written by Arab Times' Editor-in-chief Ahmed al-Jarallah citing a reliable source, said that the attack would be launched from the sea, while Patriot missiles would guard all Arab countries in the Gulf.

    Recent statements emanating from the United States indicated the Bush administration's new strategy for Iraq doesn't include any proposal to make a compromise or negotiate with Syria or Iran, added the report.

    The source told al-Jarallah that U.S. President George W. Bush recently had held a meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other assistants in the White House, where they discussed the plan to attack Iran in minute detail.

    Vice President Dick Cheney highlighted the threat posed by Iranto not only Saudi Arabia but also the whole Gulf region, according to the source.

    "Tehran is not playing politics. Iranian leaders are using their country's religious influence to support the aggressive regime's ambition to expand," Dick Cheney was quoted by the source as saying.

    Indicating participants of the meeting agreed to impose restrictions on the ambitions of Iranian regime before April 2007 without exposing other countries in the region to any danger, the source said "they have chosen April as British Prime Minister Tony

    Blair has said it will be the last month in office for him. The United States has to take action against Iran and Syria before April 2007."

    Claiming the attack will be launched from the sea and not from any country in the region, he said "the U.S. and its allies will target the oil installations and nuclear facilities of Iran ensuring there is no environmental catastrophe or after effects."

    The source added that the U.S. has started sending its warships to the Gulf and the build-up would continue until Washington has the required number by the end of this month.

    "U.S. forces in Iraq and other countries in the region will be protected against any Iranian missile attack by an advanced Patriot missile system," the source noted.

    The Bush administration believes that attacking Iran will create a new power balance in the region, calming down the situation in Iraq and paving the way for their democratic project, which have to be suspended due to the interference of Tehran and Damascus in Iraq, according to the source.
Gates: Time Is Not Right for Iran Talks

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates when he met with Britain's Defence Secretary Des Browne at Lancaster House in Central London on Sunday Jan.14, 2007. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates praised Britain's contributions to the U.S.-led military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan as he embarked Sunday on his second overseas trip since taking over at the Pentagon last month. (AP Photo / Steve Parsons/PA)

AP Military Writer
BRUSSELS, Belgium  --  Stepped up U.S. military activity in the Persian Gulf is to counter "very negative" behavior by Iran and undercut its belief that American forces are overcommitted in Iraq, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Monday.

Gates said the time is not right for diplomatic talks with Iran, but left open that possibility for the future.

After meeting with senior officials at NATO headquarters, Gates was asked at a press conference what was behind the Bush administration's decision to deploy a Patriot missile battalion and a second aircraft carrier to the Gulf region -- moves announced in connection with a further buildup of ground troops in Iraq.

He noted that the United States has taken a leading role in Gulf security for many decades.

"We are simply reaffirming that statement of the importance of the Gulf region to the United States and our determination to be an ongoing strong presence in that area for a long time into the future," he said.

Gates, who as recently as 2004 publicly called for diplomatic engagement with Iran, said the situation has changed. In 2004 Iran was concerned by the presence of U.S. forces on its eastern and western borders, in Iraq and Afghanistan. More recently, the Iranian government has come to see it differently, he said.

"The Iranians clearly believe that we are tied down in Iraq, that they have the initiative, that they are in position to press us in many ways," he said. "They are doing nothing to be constructive in Iraq at this point."

He added, "And so the Iranians are acting in a very negative way in many respects. My view is that when the Iranians are prepared to play a constructive role in dealing with some of these problems then there might be opportunities for engagement."

Gates spent a few hours at NATO headquarters for his initial meetings with allied officials and American military officials. He arrived in the Belgian capital from London, where he met with British officials on Sunday.
�To those who are afraid of the truth, I wish to offer a few scary truths; and to those who are not afraid of the truth, I wish to offer proof that the terrorism of truth is the only one that can be of benefit to the proletariat.� -- On Terrorism and the State, Gianfranco Sanguinetti

Joined: 5:57 PM - Sep 12, 2006

2:02 AM - Jan 16, 2007 #2

wtf ? they wouldn't would they ? time for a general strike or something
the 'war "against" terror' is a travelling circus, ready to pitch its macabre death display wherever self determination has a chance, in any place where transnational corporate interests say so, and while we sit in thrall at the spectacle, our pockets are being picked, and while we marvel at the shock and awe on display we should know, that the ring master's plan is that it is we who will be the future stars of the show

Joined: 1:46 AM - Nov 26, 2005

12:36 PM - Jan 20, 2007 #3

US congressmen seek Iran block
By Jonathan Beale
BBC News, Washington

A bipartisan group of US congressmen have put forward legislation to prevent the president attacking Iran without the authorisation of Congress.

The move comes amid concern at George W Bush's attitude towards Iran.

He has recently decided to ratchet up the pressure on Tehran over what he calls unhelpful behaviour in Iraq.

A second navy task force has recently been sent to the Gulf and last week US forces arrested Iranian officials in northern Iraq.

Democrats have already expressed concern about Mr Bush's decision to confront Iran rather than to engage it diplomatically.

Recent events have only heightened fears about his intentions.

Containing ambition

The bipartisan group of 11 congressmen, led by a Republican, have put forward legislation that states that no previous resolution passed by Congress authorises a US attack on Iran.

One of the Democrats who supports the legislation said that a new resolution was needed because the Bush administration had lied so many times in the run up to the Iraq war.

But it may prove more of a symbolic move as, to become law, it would need the support of the Senate and the House of Representatives and to be signed by the president himself.

US officials have been playing down talk of attacking Iran.

The US Defence Secretary, Robert Gates, who has been meeting Arab leaders, said that no-one wanted another military conflict in the region.

But Mr Gates defended the US military build-up as a way of containing Iran's ambitions.
�To those who are afraid of the truth, I wish to offer a few scary truths; and to those who are not afraid of the truth, I wish to offer proof that the terrorism of truth is the only one that can be of benefit to the proletariat.� -- On Terrorism and the State, Gianfranco Sanguinetti

Joined: 11:31 PM - May 07, 2006

9:20 PM - Feb 10, 2007 #4

Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites are well advanced

Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring
Ewen MacAskill in Washington
Saturday February 10, 2007
The Guardian

Joined: 11:31 PM - May 07, 2006

6:55 PM - Feb 12, 2007 #5

Cheney Pushing for Iran Attack, Report Says
01:56 Feb 11, '07 / 23 Shevat 5767

(IsraelNN.com) Several senior members of the Bush administration are pushing for the United States to attack Iran, the British Guardian newspaper said in a report over the weekend.

According to the report, the deployment of forces to the Persian Gulf would allow the opening of an Iranian front by the spring - but it was unlikely that any attack would take place before 2008, when U.S. President George W. Bush finishes his term of office.

The report said that Bush had not yet decided on whether to move forward with the attack, but that Vice-President Dick Cheney, among others, was strongly advocating such an attack in order top halt Iran's nuclear weapons development program.


Joined: 1:39 AM - Nov 11, 2006

2:15 AM - Feb 13, 2007 #6

An attack on Iran will be a massive mistake on the part of the U.S.

It will result in the loss of the 60% majority shi'ite support in Iraq. There will be a fatwah declared on U.S. personnel, and all hell will break loose, in both Iraq and Iran.

America, with 120,000 troops in Iraq already, will be forced to send in their remaining 40,000 in the region. The war so far has cost the U.S. 280 billion.

They made the original mistake of thinking they would be on a jolly-jaunt of liberation when they entered Iraq, complete with embedded reporters to film the parade. After three days you knew all was not well when they pulled the reporters, and refused to let them film.

However much PNAC may want to bully the world, the U.S. simply does not have the resources to do it on the massive scale necessary to match their ludicrous ambitions, or to master the intransigence of their chosen victims.

Iran will stop-cock their oil, Venezuela will do the same. 4,500,000 barrels a day will reduce oil supply a massive amount and the price of the western lifestyle will go through the roof.

It may even lead to OPEC doing as Chavez desires and switch oil deals from dollar to Euro.
People don't do what is right.
They do what's most convenient
And then they repent.

Joined: 4:31 PM - Oct 17, 2006

4:59 AM - Feb 13, 2007 #7

Troubadour @ Feb 13 2007, 02:15 AM wrote: An attack on Iran will be a massive mistake on the part of the U.S.
And the UK.

Do you not think Tony 'Woof Woof' Bliar will back Bush? Even if he doesn't, or somehow what little bit of democracy is left in this country stops him we will still be tarred with the same brush. Thanks to Bliars love-in with Bush we are now hated around the world almost as much as America.

I suspect an attack on one of Americas ships in the area will be used to justify an attack on Iran. Of course the attack will be a self sacrifice carried out by the US itself or with the help of Israel.

Russia and China have oil deals with Iran don't they?