>
> Fra: http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0204-23.htm
>
>
> Published on Sunday, February 4, 2007 by the Toronto Sun / Canada
> Fight Against Iran Too Familiar
> by Eric Margolis
>
> While the Bush/Cheney administration seems hell-bent on provoking
war with
> Iran, Americans appear far more alarmed by the dangers of global
warming.
> Many of them must regret not voting for "Ecological Al" Gore in
2000.
>
> While icebergs melt, the U.S.-Iran confrontation is getting very
> dangerous.
> The heaviest concentration of U.S. naval strike forces since the
2003 war
> against Iraq is concentrating off Iran.
>
> In a disturbing replay of that conflict, CIA drones and U.S. Air
Force
> recon
> aircraft -- along with U.S. and British Special Forces -- are
overflying
> Iran and probing its nuclear and military installations. CIA and
Britain's
> MI6 are stirring unrest among Iran's Kurds and Azerbaijanis, and
arming
> Iranian Marxist and royalist exiles.
>
> A belligerent President George Bush ordered U.S. forces in Iraq
to "kill"
> Iranian agents or diplomats who appear threatening.
>
> U.S. troops in northern Iraq broke into an Iranian liaison office
and
> arrested its military staff. Bush unblushingly warns Iran, not
to "meddle"
> in neighbouring Iraq.
>
> Pentagon sources accused Iran of smuggling weapons and explosives to
> "Iraqi
> insurgents;" though the "insurgents" are in fact Shia militiamen
allied to
> the U.S.-installed Baghdad regime. Half of the 21,000 additional
U.S.
> troops
> headed to Iraq are being positioned to cover the Iranian border and
block
> an
> Iranian threat to the main U.S. -Kuwait-Baghdad supply line.
>
> New contingents of U.S. Air Force personnel and warplanes are
arriving at
> key forward air bases in Bulgaria and Romania that link the U.S. to
the
> Mideast and Central Asia. U.S. bases in Britain, Germany, Diego
Garcia,
> the
> Persian Gulf, Central Asia, and Pakistan are reported on heightened
alert.
> Turkey is being pressed to allow U.S. and Israeli strike aircraft
to use
> its
> air space to attack northern Iran.
>
> The Pentagon's latest strike plan against Iran includes more than
2,300
> "high value" targets such as its dispersed nuclear infrastructure
and,
> worryingly, operating reactors, air and naval bases, ports,
> telecommunications, air defences, military factories, energy
networks and
> government buildings.
>
> Iran's water and sewage systems, bridges, food storage, and bomb
shelters
> could also be targeted, as were Iraq's in 2001.
>
> The U.S. Treasury has mounted a highly effective campaign to
strangle Iran
> financially, seriously hurting its foreign banking connections,
retarding
> industrial growth and energy production, and impeding foreign
investment.
>
> The Bush administration and close ally Israel have sharply
intensified
> their
> war of words against Iran, claiming, implausibly, it poses a nuclear
> threat
> to the entire world.
>
> Israeli threats
>
> Politicians in Israel are in dangerous emotional overdrive and
making open
> threats to attack Iran. They claim Iran is a new Nazi Germany and
Israel
> faces a second Holocaust -- in spite of its powerful triad of
nuclear
> forces
> that can survive any surprise attack.
>
> Though UN inspectors find no evidence Iran is producing nuclear
weapons,
> Tehran, like Saddam's Iraq, is being told to prove an impossible
> negative --
> that it has no nuclear weapons.
>
> With disturbing deja vu, the U.S. Congress and media are swallowing
the
> administration's torrent of unproven allegations against Iran
precisely
> the
> way they lapped up its grotesque lies about Iraq.
>
> Intelligence analysts would conclude either: Washington is trying
to bluff
> Tehran to abandon its entirely legal but worrisome civilian nuclear
power
> program and thus claim a major victory after so many defeats. Or,
the
> cornered Bush/Cheney administration is trying to provoke an air and
naval
> war against Iran as a last desperate, ideologically driven assault
against
> the Muslim world, and divert attention from its Iraq debacle.
>
> 'Not very dangerous'
>
> Amid growing war fever, this week France's President Jacques Chirac
> sensibly
> observed, off the record, that even if Iran had a few nuclear
weapons for
> self-defence, "it is not very dangerous."
>
> Iran would be obliterated by U.S. and Israeli nuclear
counterstrikes if it
> ever used its nukes against Israel, noted Chirac, and is unlikely to
> commit
> national suicide.
>
> After his comments became public, Chirac retracted them when
Washington's
> French-haters went apoplectic. But, as he did before Bush's 2003 war
> against
> Iraq, Chirac spoke with logic and good sense.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> Fra http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0131-28.htm
>
> Published on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 by Consortium News
> Iran Clock Is Ticking
> by Robert Parry
>
> While congressional Democrats test how far they should go in
challenging
> George W. Bush's war powers, the time may be running out to stop
Bush from
> ordering a major escalation of the Middle East conflict by
attacking Iran.
>
> Military and intelligence sources continue to tell me that
preparations
> are
> advancing for a war with Iran starting possibly as early as mid-to-
late
> February. The sources offer some differences of opinion over
whether Bush
> might cite a provocation from Iran or whether Israel will take the
lead in
> launching air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities.
>
> But there is growing alarm among military and intelligence experts
that
> Bush
> already has decided to attack and simply is waiting for a second
aircraft
> carrier strike force to arrive in the region - and for a propaganda
blitz
> to
> stir up some pro-war sentiment at home.
>
> One well-informed U.S. military source called me in a fury after
> consulting
> with Pentagon associates and discovering how far along the war
> preparations
> are. He said the plans call for extensive aerial attacks on Iran,
> including
> use of powerful bunker-busting ordnance.
>
> Another source with a pipeline into Israeli thinking said the Iran
war
> plan
> has expanded over the past several weeks. Earlier thinking had been
that
> Israeli warplanes would hit Iranian nuclear targets with U.S.
forces in
> reserve in case of Iranian retaliation, but now the strategy
anticipates a
> major U.S. military follow-up to an Israeli attack, the source said.
>
> Both sources used the same word "crazy" in describing the plan to
expand
> the
> war to Iran. The two sources, like others I have interviewed, said
that
> attacking Iran could touch off a regional - and possibly global -
> conflagration.
>
> "It will be like the TV show '24'," the American military source
said,
> citing the likelihood of Islamic retaliation reaching directly into
the
> United States.
>
> Though Bush insists that no decision has been made on attacking
Iran, he
> offered similar assurances of his commitment to peace in the months
before
> invading Iraq in 2003. Yet leaked documents from London made clear
that he
> had set a course for war nine months to a year before the Iraq
invasion.
>
> In other words, Bush's statements that he has no plans to "invade"
Iran
> and
> that he's still committed to settle differences with Iran over its
nuclear
> program diplomatically should be taken with a grain of salt.
>
> There is, of course, the possibility that the war preparations are
a game
> of
> chicken to pressure Iran to accept outside controls on its nuclear
program
> and to trim back its regional ambitions. But sometimes such high-
stakes
> gambles lead to miscalculations or set in motion dynamics that
can't be
> controlled.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.27/671 - Release Date:
2/5/2007
>
