Posted on 02/09/2005 8:24:57 PM PST by F14 Pilot
The U.S. military is updating its war plan for Iran, a senior officer said yesterday, but he called the planning routine and said pressure on Tehran to curb a nuclear weapons program remains a diplomatic rather than military effort.
"We are in that process, that normal process, of updating our war plans," said Lt. Gen. Lance Smith, deputy commander of the U.S. Central Command, which is responsible for U.S. forces across the Middle East, Central Asia and parts of North Africa. "We try to keep them current, particularly if . . . our region is active," he said in response to reporters' questions at a Pentagon news conference.
Smith indicated the Iran contingency planning grew out of a broad, long-range effort to freshen routine plans for countries in the region and was not the product of a specific or urgent request.
"I haven't been called into any late-night meetings at, you know, 8 o'clock at night, saying, 'Holy cow, we got to sit down and go plan for Iran,' " he said. "I'm not spending any of my time worrying about the nuclear proliferation in Iran," he said, adding that at this stage diplomatic efforts by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice are "adequate for our needs."
Smith's comments came after a week in which the Bush administration repeatedly warned Iran to give up what Washington contends is an effort to gain nuclear weapons.
Earlier yesterday, Rice told reporters in Brussels that the United States and its European allies have made their nonproliferation demands clear but have set "no deadline" for action by Tehran. "The Iranians know what they need to do. They shouldn't be permitted, under cover of civilian nuclear power . . . to try to build a nuclear weapon," she said.
At the White House, President Bush ...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
We have war plans for so many countries..just in case.
Bush is on the case and Blair taking a harder line.
Buckle your seat belts.
Turning up the heat. I bet the Mullahs are still crying over Comrade Kerry losing to President Bush
?.....Does that include the U.N. headquarters too?
/Sarcasm
More psyops..messing with the mullahs heads..I'd wager that an old, out of date plan somehow "leaks" to the NY Times..
LOL!
Especially because Kerry wanted to give Iran the nuclear materials.
tick...tick...tick....
Somebody tell me how we can have any more military operations when we have such a small military? We have almost everyone in Iraq, coming back from Iraq, or getting ready to go to Iraq, don't we?
Would we just send those unmanned drones over there and bomb the heck out of them?
So many war plans, so little time.....
"Oh Most High Excellency Mullah Muckymuck, our intelligence has revealed the name of the American Satan's war plan, but we cannot decipher it.
O wise one, what does "MOAB" and "Bunkerbuster" mean?"
WaPo is trying to scream that we have revived war plans.
That is bad.
If we didn't have newly revised war plans?
WaPo would say that would be bad.
CNN just did a whole show on our problems with our limited strike plans - "they are bad". But if we had to go large? "That would be bad".
But, then they complain that every little thing isn't planned & written in stone.
2 things, weenies-
You can't have it both ways.
As Murphy said, "No plan survives first contact in tact."
Especially because Kerry wanted to give Iran the nuclear materials.
Comrade Kerry stated that if he became President, he would travel the world the first month to "Apologized" for our policies. I bet you he would have went to Tehran. He would have proclaimed that he has negotiated a breakthrough with Iran and has achieved “Peace in Our Time”. In fact like Chamberlain he would have appeased the Mullahs and thus guaranteed a nuclear armed Iran. He also would have sabotaged Iraq to discredited President Bush and insure the Democratic Party hegemony in the government. The Party & Power mean everything to Comrade Kerry & his brethren.
If the Left, CNN & rest of MSM think that a military strike on Iran’s nuclear sites is bad, maybe it’s good. In fact, I watched the West Wing (they had a preview about this) & President Bartlett was echoing the Do not attack Iran Nuke sites Democratic Party line. The main theme was the following: That Iran’s current government is good (by our actions, we force them to take these steps to get nukes) & the United States is bad. We deserve what we get mentality.
Before WWII, the U.S. had assigned each country a color and each war plan was named for that color. Some were very real possibilities while others were unlikely. One would probably freak out people to know that it even existed.
War Plan Red- War with the British Empire Each part of the Empire had its own color, Canada was Crimson, India was Ruby, Australia was Scarlet, etc. Practiced, rehearsed, and refined until 1940.
War Plan Green- War with Mexico or Mexican Domestic Intervention Not officially canceled until 1946
War Plan Black- War with Germany Not seriously considered after WWI.
War Plan Orange- War with Japan Used as part of War Plan Rainbow 5 during WWII in the Pacific.
War Plan Red/Orange- War with the Japanese/British Alliance
War Plan Yellow-War with China or China Domestic Intervention
War Plan Gray- Azores Intervention
War Plan Emerald- Ireland Intervention (In Conjunction with War Plan Red)
War Plan Indigo- Iceland Intervention
War Plan Lemon- War with Portugal
War Plan Tan- Cuba Intervention
Others were War Plan Gold-War with France, War Plan Silver-War with Italy, War Plan Purple- War with Russia/Soviet Union, War Plan Citron- War with Brazil, and War Plan Olive- War with Spain.
One war plan stands out and that is War Plan White. It received serious attention for decades due to the implications associated with it should it ever have had to be used. War Plan White was known as the "U.S. Domestic Contingency".
No, we are not overstretched. Our total military force is about 3 million. We are now fighting a multi front war. Iran, Iraq, Syria, China, Russia, etc are different fronts of that war. You use different options for different fronts. Perhaps the Iranian people with a little help from the US can topple the Mullahs. I don't buy the Left's new spin that an Attack on Iran's nuke site will unite the Iranians. To me it would signal weakness that the United States could destroy significant part of their nuke program. What really kept Saddam in power. The answer is his WMD.
I thought we had war plans for just about anything..Thanks for this interesting bit of history.
I thought he did not have any WMD since we did not find them?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.