Who is planning our next war?

WorldNetDaily ^ | 9 Jan 07 | patrick j buchanan

[CWOJackson]

As George Bush reflects on his legacy, an urgent question must be pressing in upon him each day.

Will I leave here as the man who launched failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that cost thousands of U.S. dead, to no avail? Or can I yet enter history as the Churchillian statesman who used U.S. power to save America and Israel from the mortal threat of atomic weapons in the hands of the Iranian mullahs?

Which legacy would Bush prefer? Or Cheney?

As Americans await Bush's address announcing a "surge" of 20,000 to 30,000 U.S. troops to Iraq, we may be missing the larger picture. The War Party is turning its attention from Iraq -- to Iran.

Nor is it simply an analysis of the character of George Bush that causes one to so conclude.

Tehran is now two weeks into a 60-day deadline to answer a Security Council resolution directing it to cease enriching uranium. While the sanctions are mild, the resolution passed unanimously and gives Bush the U.N. cover he used to wage war on Iraq. If Iran defies the United Nations, Bush will demand further sanctions. Up the escalator we go.

Moreover, a second U.S. carrier battle group is heading for the Gulf. More interesting, the new CentCom commander, replacing Gen. John Abizaid, is no soldier, but Adm. William J. Fallon, commander in chief of U.S. forces in the Pacific. What Fallon does not know about securing streets, he does know about taking out targets from the air and keeping sea lanes open in a time of war.

Bush may be sending signals, but the Israelis are preparing for war. The London Sunday Times reports that Israeli pilots have been making the 2,000-mile run to Gibraltar to train for strikes with bunker-busting nuclear bombs on Iran's heavy water plant at Arak, the uranium hexaflouride facility at Isfahan and the centrifuge cascade at Natanz.

Israel angrily denies the report. But, on Dec. 30, retired Gen. Oded Tira, who headed up all Israeli artillery units, burst into print with this admonition:

"As an American air strike in Iran is essential for our existence, we must help (Bush) pave the way by lobbying the Democratic Party (which is conducting itself foolishly) and U.S. newspaper editors. We need to do this in order to turn the Iranian issue to a bipartisan one and unrelated to the Iraq failure."

"Bush lacks the political power to attack Iran," writes Tira. Thus, Israel and its U.S. lobbying arm "must turn to Hillary Clinton and other potential presidential candidates in the Democratic Party so that they publicly support immediate action by Bush against Iran."

"The Americans must act," Tira concludes. "If they don't, we'll do it ourselves ... (and) we must immediately start preparing for an Iranian response to an attack."

According to UPI editor-at-large Arnaud De Borchgrave, Tira's line tracks the New Year's Day message of Likud superhawk "Bibi" Netanyahu, the former prime minister.

Said Netanyahu, Israel "must immediately launch an intense, international public relations front first and foremost on the U.S. The goal being to encourage President Bush to live up to specific pledges he would not allow Iran to arm itself with nuclear weapons. We must make clear to the (U.S.) government, the Congress and the American public that a nuclear Iran is a threat to the U.S. and the entire world, not only Israel."

Israel's war, says Bibi, must be sold as America's war.

We are thus forewarned. A propaganda campaign, using Israeli agents and their neocon auxiliaries and sympathizers, who stampeded us into war in Iraq, is being prepared to stampede us into war on Iran.

We are to be convinced that Iran, with no air force or navy to speak of, an economy not 2 percent of ours, which has not started a single war since the revolution, 27 years ago, is about to give to terrorists, to use on us, a nuclear bomb it may be 10 years away from even being able to build.

Will Congress be duped again into giving Bush a blank check for war? Or will this new Congress summon the courage to take the war option out of Bush's hands, to decide itself, for the nation, when, where and whether America should ever go to war against Iran?

Every presidential candidate should be asked: Does President Bush have the authority to attack Iran without specific congressional authorization? And would you support giving him that authority?

Needed today are courageous men and women of both parties who will introduce and pass a congressional resolution stating, "In the absence of a direct Iranian attack on U.S. forces or personnel, or an imminent threat of such an attack, President Bush has no authority to launch a pre-emptive strike or a preventive war on Iran."

If we are going to war, let us do it constitutionally, for once, and not leave it up solely to George W. Bush and Brother Cheney.

[CWOJackson]

For you ladies to compare with the words of our President.

[rlmorel]

Pat Buchanan jumped the shark a long time ago.

I personally do not feel President Bush is obsessed about his legacy the way some former Presidents are. He was President on 9/11...I think he is more concerned with keeping our country safe than he is with his legacy.

[lonestar67]

I was planning to jokingly suggest an answer:

Surely it is the JOOOOOOOS Pat

But, as reliable as a clock, Pat puts the answer in his essays.

I wonder how Pat enjoyed the holocaust denial conference in Iran. If he did not go, its a real shame.

[cripplecreek]

We've lost in Afghanistan now too?

[rip033]

"Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity — and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.

We are also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. We will expand intelligence sharing — and deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies. We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border. And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region."


Pulled from the text of the President's speech. See above... One note on this posting. This President may not care about "His Legacy". He may actually have the same beliefs as Churchill and Roosevelt. This reporter who wrote this is arrogant enough to tell us what the President is thinking.

[Howlin]

What a fool he is.

[TADSLOS]

Well, at least Pat is consistent. Consistently anti-Israel and consistently wrong headed.

[nopardons]

Many thanks for the ping! :-)

[rlmorel]

Agreed....particularly your last paragraph.

[joseph20]

We are to be convinced that Iran, with no air force or navy to speak of, an economy not 2 percent of ours, which has not started a single war since the revolution, 27 years ago, is about to give to terrorists, to use on us, a nuclear bomb it may be 10 years away from even being able to build.

How does Buchanan know that Iran is 10 years away from building a nuclear bomb?

And why does Buchanan minimize the threat that comes from the single largest state-sponsor of terrorism in the entire world?

[Howlin]

This reporter who wrote this is arrogant enough to tell us what the President is thinking.

That would be on Patrick J. Buchanan, who never could be president.

[CWOJackson]

"I wonder how Pat enjoyed the holocaust denial conference in Iran. If he did not go, its a real shame."

He may not have been invited. Even a despot can have some limits.

[Howlin]

Or will this new Congress summon the courage to take the war option out of Bush's hands, to decide itself, for the nation, when, where and whether America should ever go to war against Iran?

Has Pat rewritten the Constitution while we weren't looking?

[SeaBiscuit]

By God, I wouldn't want to depend on this guy to protect me from enemies.

Pray for our CIC and Troops.

[dighton]

A propaganda campaign, using Israeli agents and their neocon auxiliaries and sympathizers, who stampeded us into war in Iraq, is being prepared to stampede us into war on Iran.

Waiting for his few remaining defenders to check in from Argentina.

[popdonnelly]

Now Buchanan is bitching about Afghanistan? No, I forgot, he bitched about it before it started. We have to consult with Mr. Buchanan first, so we can find out which military action is acceptable. Really, it's a waste of time to read opinion from a former Agnew speechwriter.

[KantianBurke]

"We are to be convinced that Iran, with no air force or navy to speak of, an economy not 2 percent of ours, which has not started a single war since the revolution, 27 years ago, is about to give to terrorists, to use on us, a nuclear bomb it may be 10 years away from even being able to build."

Pat's been right on target with regards to immigration, the culture war ect ect. But he's wrong on this one and I'll be the first to admit it.

[popdonnelly]

"A propaganda campaign, using Israeli agents and their neocon auxiliaries and sympathizers, who stampeded us into war in Iraq, is being prepared to stampede us into war on Iran."

That's not a very lucid observation, is it?

[Mo1]

Bite me Pat