|
|
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter, who was among the original experts to question Bush Administration claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, now says he believes an attack on Iran is a "virtual guarantee."
"We take a look at the military buildup, we take a look at the rhetoric, we take a look at the diplomatic posturing, and I would say that it?s a virtual guarantee that there will be a limited aerial strike against Iran in the not-so-near future?or not-so-distant future, that focuses on the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Command," Ritter said last week in a little-noted interview with Amy Goodman's Democracy Now. "And if this situation spins further out of control, you would see these aerial strikes expanding to include Iran?s nuclear infrastructure and some significant command and control targets."
The Pentagon denied the claim again Monday.
...
Ritter's remark about Iran comes on the heels of a report Sunday in the UK Sunday Times' which alleges that the Pentagon is drawing up plans for a "surgical strike" against an alleged insurgent training camp in Iran, and a CBS report that suggests US forces are prepared to launch small-scale attacks.
Attributing the assertion to Western intelligence officials, the Times' Michael Smith asserts that US officials have become increasingly frustrated with Iran's Republican Guard force -- an elite corps of the country's military -- which the Bush Administration has designated a terrorist group. Western officials have accused Iran of helping arming rebel militias in Iraq, and have accused Iran of supplying IEDs.
Smith was the first to reveal the Downing Street Minutes, an account of a secret 2002 meeting between Bush Administration officials and British intelligence surrounding Iraq, in which MI6 director Richard Dearlove remarked that facts around Iraq were being "fixed" around a policy for war.
"US commanders are increasingly concerned by Iranian interference in Iraq and are determined that recent successes by joint Iraqi and US forces in the southern port city of Basra should not be reversed by the Quds Force," Smith writes."'If the situation in Basra goes back to what it was like before, America is likely to blame Iran and carry out a surgical strike on a militant training camp across the border in Khuzestan,'" he quotes a defense official as saying.
Nuclear facilities 'not targets'
Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker and RAW STORY's Larisa Alexandrovna revealed internal Pentagon planning in a buildup to a potential Iran conflict. Since the reports ran, however, rhetoric about Iran has been toned down and concerns of a potential all-out war have diminished.
American officials are opposed to any attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, Smith says. They believe, however, that an attack on a militant camp could send a message to the Republican Guard.
CBS News reported last week about a potential strike on Iran.
"Targets would include everything from the plants where weapons are made to the headquarters of the organization known as the Quds Force which directs operations in Iraq," they wrote.
"U.S. officials are also concerned by Iranian harassment of U.S. ships in the Persian Gulf as well as Iran's still growing nuclear program," CBS adds. "New pictures of Iran's uranium enrichment plant show the country's defense minister in the background, as if deliberately mocking a recent finding by U.S. intelligence that Iran had ceased work on a nuclear weapon."
Sources told Smith that no attack was planned on Iranian nuclear facilities. Such attack plans have been criticized, because many of Iran's facilities are located underground and not all locations might be neutralized by an airstrike.
"If an attack happens it will be on a training camp to send a clear message to Iran not to interfere," one intelligence officer said. source Anybody else getting a strange feeling of deja vu? What do we do now?
|
Posts:
211
Registered:
4/12/08
|
|
(5 of 5)
Re: War With Iran A "Virtual Guarantee" ?
May 6, 2008 12:25 AM
|
Can I push the button this time please?
Kill American soldiers... you will die. Its a simple propositiion, and one which I support whole heartedly.
Maybe instead of trying to stop our RESPONSE, you should plead with the Iranians to stop killing American servicemen.
If they stop, your fears will be abaited.
--
My Logo.. call me Al.
Its the SUN Stupid T-Shirt
|
|
|
Posts:
1,945
Registered:
4/11/08
|
|
(4 of 5)
Re: War With Iran A "Virtual Guarantee" ?
May 5, 2008 10:02 PM
|
Calm down, we don't have the resources anyway and the Democratic congress would never approve an attack on Iran, certainly at no time in the near future. This is just liberal media nonsense to stir up fears of an all out war with Iran "if the Reps" win the White House.
Of course, should Iran attack Israel, Hillary said she'll obliterate Iran.
|
|
|
Posts:
1,469
Registered:
4/9/03
|
|
(3 of 5)
Re: War With Iran A "Virtual Guarantee" ?
May 5, 2008 8:21 PM
|
The Israeli-Zionist push for mounting a new war against Iran.
As reported in Haaretz !!!!!!!!!!
?The most important thing (sic) that should be said about Bush is that had I told him that I was opposed to this move (Annapolis meeting), he wouldn?t have embarked on it.
I could have blocked the move.
Had I been unwilling to co-operate with him, Bush wouldn?t have coerced me?.
I spoke to the President with unparalleled sharpness about these matters (bombing Iran?s nuclear facilities) and my comments were extremely well received ?
regarding the freedom (to bomb Iran) we are reserving for ourselves and what we will and won?t do."
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in Haaretz November 29, 2007.
http://www.countercurrents.org/petras111207.htm
|
|
|
Posts:
1,469
Registered:
4/9/03
|
|
(2 of 5)
Re: War With Iran A "Virtual Guarantee" ?
May 5, 2008 4:55 PM
|
There will be NO WAR with Iran ??????
No the only Super Power or its Flag Ship Israel will press some buttons for ''Bunker Buster'' missiles to be on their way & hopefully kill as few civilians as possible ---like in the Iraq invasion where he civilian dead count is NOW over one million !!!!
Joseph Lieberman & the neocons can't wait after all it is
in America's BEST INTERESTS !!!
Get Ready for some major BlowBack !!!!
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/
|
|
|
Posts:
367
Registered:
3/4/08
|
|
(1 of 5)
War With Iran A "Virtual Guarantee" ?
May 5, 2008 12:31 PM
|
Former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter, who was among the original experts to question Bush Administration claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, now says he believes an attack on Iran is a "virtual guarantee."
"We take a look at the military buildup, we take a look at the rhetoric, we take a look at the diplomatic posturing, and I would say that it?s a virtual guarantee that there will be a limited aerial strike against Iran in the not-so-near future?or not-so-distant future, that focuses on the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Command," Ritter said last week in a little-noted interview with Amy Goodman's Democracy Now. "And if this situation spins further out of control, you would see these aerial strikes expanding to include Iran?s nuclear infrastructure and some significant command and control targets."
The Pentagon denied the claim again Monday.
...
Ritter's remark about Iran comes on the heels of a report Sunday in the UK Sunday Times' which alleges that the Pentagon is drawing up plans for a "surgical strike" against an alleged insurgent training camp in Iran, and a CBS report that suggests US forces are prepared to launch small-scale attacks.
Attributing the assertion to Western intelligence officials, the Times' Michael Smith asserts that US officials have become increasingly frustrated with Iran's Republican Guard force -- an elite corps of the country's military -- which the Bush Administration has designated a terrorist group. Western officials have accused Iran of helping arming rebel militias in Iraq, and have accused Iran of supplying IEDs.
Smith was the first to reveal the Downing Street Minutes, an account of a secret 2002 meeting between Bush Administration officials and British intelligence surrounding Iraq, in which MI6 director Richard Dearlove remarked that facts around Iraq were being "fixed" around a policy for war.
"US commanders are increasingly concerned by Iranian interference in Iraq and are determined that recent successes by joint Iraqi and US forces in the southern port city of Basra should not be reversed by the Quds Force," Smith writes."'If the situation in Basra goes back to what it was like before, America is likely to blame Iran and carry out a surgical strike on a militant training camp across the border in Khuzestan,'" he quotes a defense official as saying.
Nuclear facilities 'not targets'
Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker and RAW STORY's Larisa Alexandrovna revealed internal Pentagon planning in a buildup to a potential Iran conflict. Since the reports ran, however, rhetoric about Iran has been toned down and concerns of a potential all-out war have diminished.
American officials are opposed to any attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, Smith says. They believe, however, that an attack on a militant camp could send a message to the Republican Guard.
CBS News reported last week about a potential strike on Iran.
"Targets would include everything from the plants where weapons are made to the headquarters of the organization known as the Quds Force which directs operations in Iraq," they wrote.
"U.S. officials are also concerned by Iranian harassment of U.S. ships in the Persian Gulf as well as Iran's still growing nuclear program," CBS adds. "New pictures of Iran's uranium enrichment plant show the country's defense minister in the background, as if deliberately mocking a recent finding by U.S. intelligence that Iran had ceased work on a nuclear weapon."
Sources told Smith that no attack was planned on Iranian nuclear facilities. Such attack plans have been criticized, because many of Iran's facilities are located underground and not all locations might be neutralized by an airstrike.
"If an attack happens it will be on a training camp to send a clear message to Iran not to interfere," one intelligence officer said. source
Anybody else getting a strange feeling of deja vu? What do we do now?
|
|
|
|
|
