Rob sent- >http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,12858,1392078,00.html > >American special forces have been on the ground inside Iran scouting >for US air strike targets for suspected nuclear weapons sites, >according to the renowned US investigative journalist Seymour Hersh. >In an article in the latest edition of the New Yorker, Hersh, who was >the first to uncover US human rights abuses against Iraqi detainees at >Abu Ghraib prison last year, reports that Pakistan, under a deal with >Washington, has been supplying information on Iranian military sites >and on its nuclear programme, enabling the US to conduct covert ground >and air reconnaissance of Iranian targets, should the escalating row >over Iran's nuclear ambitions come to a head. > >Acting on information from Pakistani scientists knowledgeable about >Iran's nuclear programme, Hersh reported, US commandos have penetrated >territory in eastern Iran seeking to pinpoint underground >installations suspected of being nuclear weapons sites. > >Hersh told CNN yesterday: "I think they really think there's a chance >to do something in Iran, perhaps by summer, to get the intelligence on >the sites. > >"The last thing this government wants to do is to bomb or strafe, or >missile attack, the wrong targets again. We don't want another WMD >flap. We want to be sure we have the right information." > >The New Yorker report said the Americans have been conducting secret >reconnaissance missions over and inside Iran since last summer with a >view to identifying up to 40 possible targets for strikes should the >dispute over Iran turn violent.
I guess I am not sure of the "point" of this article. From a simple reality stand point there are SF guys in countries where we are militarily active and those that are not. The above paragraphs hype what these guys do everyday, building relationships with locals and scouting out things that are important. A simplistic explanation of the SF mission, but in a previous part of my life I had friends who "went off" to parts unknown for unknown duration several times a year in their "area of responsibility". At it's basic level I recall someone telling me-partisans aren't built in a day. The writing is "dramatic" with "secret reconnaissance", but I guess it is true that these guys don't publicize their presence. >"This is a war against terrorism and Iraq is just one campaign," Hersh >quotes one former US intelligence official as saying. "The Bush >administration is looking at this as a huge war zone. Next we're going >to have the Iranian campaign." > >Another unnamed source described as a consultant close to the Pentagon >said: "The civilians in the Pentagon want to go into Iran and destroy >as much of the military infrastructure as possible." > >That appeared to be a reference to noted "neocons" in Washington, such >as the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, >and others. > >Arguments about Iran's suspected nuclear programme have raged for 20 >months since it was revealed that Tehran had been conducting secret >nuclear activities for 18 years in violation of treaty obligations. Call me cynical, but as much as factions of the admin may consider Iran an area they "want", it would be political suicide for this government to work on additional fronts. This article seems to me to be more like a "misinformation"/"hype"/implied "threat" article in some type of sabre-rattling for the Iranians or IAEA. Smacks more of a pissing contest being aired in public versus news. >The International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna has had inspectors in >the country throughout the period. While finding much that is suspect, >the inspectors have not found any proof of a clandestine nuclear bomb >programme. > >The IAEA chief, Mohamed ElBaradei, has infuriated the Bush >administration over his even-handed dealings with Iran, while the >Europeans have been pursuing a parallel diplomatic track that has won >grudging agreement from Tehran to freeze its uranium enrichment >activities. > >Hersh reported that the US campaign against Iran is being assisted by >Pakistan under a deal that sees Islamabad provide information in >return for reducing the pressure on Abdul Qadeer Khan, the disgraced >metallurgist who is the father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb and who was >revealed last year to be the head of the biggest international nuclear >smuggling racket uncovered. (snip) Simple minded, but I don't see a whole lot here to get worked up about. Seems like a few things strung together for a bit of sensation... but I don't often get calls for political consultations. Dee _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
