IRAN-Deja vu all over again?

by JWdaughter 318 Replies latest social current

  • JWoods
    Several Arab nations have already made it quietly clear that an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear sites would be welcome.

    Plausible deniability. They likely feel nearly as much danger from Iran as does Israel. I still doubt Israel can stop the Iran nuke on it's own.

  • freydo

    Ex-CIA Chief Hayden: Military Strike on Iran Likely

    Sunday, 25 Jul 2010 12:47 PM

    "A former CIA director says military action against Iran now seems more likely because no matter what the U.S. does diplomatically, Tehran keeps pushing ahead with its suspected nuclear program. Michael Hayden, a CIA chief under President George W. Bush, said that during his tenure "a strike was way down the list of options." But he tells CNN's State of the Union that such action now "seems inexorable." "In my personal thinking," Hayden said, "I have begun to consider that that may not be the worst of all possible outcomes."

    Hayden said that the likelihood of a U.S. strike on Iran has risen in the face of Tehran's defiance to halt its contentions nuclear program, saying "We engage. They continue to move forward." "We vote for sanctions. They continue to move forward. We try to deter, to dissuade. They continue to move forward," he added. The former CIA chief predicted Iran, in defiance of the international community, planned to "get itself to that step right below a nuclear weapon, that permanent breakout stage, so the needle isn’t quite in the red for the international community."

    Hayden said that reaching even that level would be "as destabilizing to the region as actually having a weapon." Hayden also called homegrown terrorism "a devil of a problem" and the most serious threat facing American citizens. "In a democracy it’s incredibly difficult,” he said. “Look, we’ve all made our compromises with al-Qaeda and the al-Qaeda kinds of attacks. "But how do you build a security structure that guards you against American citizens who are beginning to change in their thinking up to a point where they become a threat to the security of other Americans? That’s a devil of a problem." Hayden said that the next step the intelligence community would take to combat homegrown terrorists would inevitably begin to infringe on the privacy of Americans, and that was still too steep of a price to pay. "What are you or your viewers willing to pay?" he asked CNN interviewer Candy Crowley. “How much would you allow us commerce or privacy or convenience in order to get down to that level of granularity. And frankly, I think American political culture. I think you and I, as citizens, would be uncomfortable going very far in that direction. That what makes this such a devilish problem."

    Hayden also emphasized that the U.S. military should stay in Afghanistan and that al-Qaeda’s influence in the country was waning becomes of the presence of U.S. armed forces. If the U.S. withdrew prematurely, it would be detrimental to American security. "I would let this go for a while longer,” he said. “With regards to the small number of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, that may be a reflection of American combat power in Afghanistan and if one were to remove that combat power, one would naturally see the number of al-Qaeda rise."

    But it was the Iranian threat that most concerned Hayden, he stressed. The United States, the United Nations and the European Union have imposed new restrictions on Iran over its nuclear enrichment activities, which the West fears could lead it to make a bomb. The fourth round of U.N. sanctions calls for measures against new Iranian banks abroad if a link to the nuclear or missile programs is suspected and for vigilance on transactions with any Iranian bank, including the central bank. On Saturday, several key Iranian officials estimated that the United States and Israel would not dare attempt a military strike of Iran's nuclear sites, adding that they were confident that Iranian forces would easily repel such an attempt, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported.

    The United States, which has ships in the Persian Gulf, has not ruled out a military strike to thwart what it suspects is an Iranian nuclear weapons program. Iran denies its atomic program is aimed at making weapons. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Saturday that Israel and the United States would never strike Iran, saying that "both the U.S. and Zionist regime face internal problems and they know that we make many troubles for them if they attack Iranian territory." Yahya Rahim Safav told ISNA, Iran’s news agency, that Iran's armed forces were "fully prepared and enemies are aware of that, they do not have the power to take a political decision on the issue, because they know they can start the war but are not able to finish it." "We need to be fully vigilant of these attacks, the enemy knows that it will regret if launches a land strike against Iran." Safavi said. The commander of the Islamic Republic's Revolutionary Guards, Mohammad-Ali Ja'fari said that the United States would not dare to attack Iran as it is fully aware of Iran’s defense power and its nation’s determination, Haaretz reported.

    Ja'fari also said, according to the IRNA report, that he considered his forces' preparedness as being at their "highest level," adding that recent sanctions imposed on Iran in view of its contentious nuclear program would have no impact on Iran's potency. Also Saturday, a former naval chief in Iran's Revolutionary Guard said his country has set aside 100 military vessels to confront each U.S. warship that poses a threat. General Morteza Saffari is quoted by the conservative weekly Panjereh Saturday as saying that troops aboard U.S. warships "are morsels for Iran to target in the event of any American threat against Iran." In 2008, Iran put its most powerful military force, the Revolutionary Guard, in charge of defending the country's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, a vital oil route. Speaking with the semi-official Fars news agency, Iran's Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi said that the increased U.S. pressure on Iran were prompted by Washington's desire to advance its "propaganda campaign "and gain control of the region."............."

  • designs

    War Games

    Every country with a sizable military force has their Offense and Defense strategy on the boards. The US has had the War Game for retaking the North Korean Peninsula since the 50's.

  • leavingwt

    Iran Defiant in Nuclear Documents

    As Iran and world powers prepare for new nuclear talks, letters from Tehran's envoys to top international officials suggest little prospect of major progress, with Tehran combative and unlikely to offer any concessions.

    Two letters, both written late last month and obtained by The Associated Press, reflect Iran's apparent determination to continue the nuclear activities that have led to new rounds of U.N., EU, and U.S. sanctions over fears that Tehran might be seeking to develop nuclear arms.

    At the same time, world powers preparing to talk to Tehran are unwilling to cede ground on key demands concerning Iran's uranium enrichment activities, dimming prospects that the new negotiations will ease tensions.

    Iran insists it want to enrich uranium only to make fuel for a planned reactor network and denies accusations that it will use the program to make fissile warhead material.

    But international suspicions are strong. Tehran hid its enrichment program until it was revealed from the outside. And it acknowledged constructing a secret nuclear facility to the International Atomic Energy Agency last year only days before its existence was publicly revealed by the U.S. and Britain.

    Since its enrichment program was unmasked eight years ago, Tehran has defied four U.N. Security Council sanctions meant to pressure it into freezing enrichment. Sporadic negotiations between Iran and all or some of the permanent U.N. Security Council members plus Germany also have failed to make headway.

    . . .

  • leavingwt

    Cameron Foreign Policy Gaffe

    The prime minister was asked why he was backing Turkey to join the EU and said it could help solve the world’s problems….”like the Middle East peace process, like the fact that Iran has got a nuclear weapon”.
    . . .
    Downing Street said Mr Cameron “mis-spoke”. He had meant to say that Iran appeared to be trying to pursue a nuclear programme.

  • leavingwt

    Iran's Revolutionary Guard 'digging mass graves for US soldiers'

    General Hossein Moghadam, the Guard's former deputy chief, was speaking after film footage showed strings of freshly dug graves in the south of the country.

    They were close to the site of war graves for the dead of the long war between Iran and Saddam Hussein's Iraq, which devastated the region in the 1980s.

    "The mass graves that used to be for burying Saddam's soldiers have now been prepared again for US soldiers, and this is the reason for digging this big number of graves," Gen Moghadam told the Associated Press, which obtained the footage.

    The warning is unlikely to be more than symbolic. No-one expects a land invasion, should the White House authorise a strike on nuclear facilities, while Iran has so far suggested counter-action is most likely to be aimed at American allies in the Gulf and Western bases there.

    Gen Moghadam's claims might be a sign that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who is increasingly reliant on the Revolutionary Guard for political backing, is feeling the heat of international diplomatic pressure over his aggressive posture on Iran's uranium enrichment programme.

    . . .

  • llbh

    JWoods, hillary_ step's discussion with you was based on knowledge of the area and not based just on watching the media. It is also worth reminding you again that much of what goes in Afghanistan is neither instigated nor supported by Iran; The USA relied very much on Iranian help for the invasion of Afghanistan because the Iranian form Islam is very very different from that of the Taliban, (see my post to Freydo) and they loathe Taliban as much as the US does.

    As for BTS and his statement about some Arab nations, and welcoming an Israeli attack on Iran, the same applies, with the added twist that they are very different ethnically too.

    I suspect General Moghamadam was playing to his own audience, and that his bellicosity and hyperbole was to shore up his own position; he knows that the USA, with positioning of just one its Aircraft Carriers would have total air superiority..

    The regime in Iran more is isolated than ever, and the sanctions are damaging it.

    I saw Cameron's stance on Turkey too and was surprised by him; it is a very enlightened view, and if followed through could greatly alter the dynamics in the region.


  • Justitia Themis
    Justitia Themis

    much of what goes in Afghanistan is neither instigated nor supported by Iran; The USA relied very much on Iranian help for the invasion of Afghanistan because the Iranian form Islam is very very different from that of the Taliban, (see my post to Freydo) and they loathe Taliban as much as the US does.

    llbh, the vast majority of poster here see Islam as one vast monolith. That alone it sad; however, even more disturbing is that they are quite to content to remain obtuse to its nuances. Simply put, they like their prejudices and don't want to be disturbed with facts.

    Some have knowledge of Islam, but lack any political perspective whatsovever. There is one poster (can't remember who it is) that claims to have studied Islam for 20 years or so...but never comments on the political backstory. So this poster has a very complete knowledge base of precisely one-half of the pie.

    Our "success" in Iraq is also due to Iranian accomodation. One word from Iran and al Sadr could begin his Shia campaign of disrupting US supply lines...again. The IEDs that were used in the south were from Iran. They sent a clear message to George Bush that you will "win" only if we allow you.

    If they wanted to be spoilers in the world, they would have already done so.

  • Justitia Themis
    Justitia Themis

    very different ethnically too.

    Yes...quite different. Iranians are white people. Arabs are Arabs.

    just for laughs... :)

  • BurnTheShips

    Iran in the 1970's.

    Too bad the Islamist Ayatoilets took over.


Share this