Posted on 02/09/2007 7:51:29 PM PST by blam
Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring
Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites are well advanced
Ewen MacAskill in Washington
Saturday February 10, 2007
The Guardian (UK)
A second battle group has been ordered to the Gulf and extra missiles have already been sent out. Meanwhile oil is being stockpiled. Photograph: Reuters
US preparations for an air strike against Iran are at an advanced stage, in spite of repeated public denials by the Bush administration, according to informed sources in Washington. The present military build-up in the Gulf would allow the US to mount an attack by the spring. But the sources said that if there was an attack, it was more likely next year, just before Mr Bush leaves office.
Neo-conservatives, particularly at the Washington-based American Enterprise Institute, are urging Mr Bush to open a new front against Iran. So too is the vice-president, Dick Cheney. The state department and the Pentagon are opposed, as are Democratic congressmen and the overwhelming majority of Republicans. The sources said Mr Bush had not yet made a decision. The Bush administration insists the military build-up is not offensive but aimed at containing Iran and forcing it to make diplomatic concessions. The aim is to persuade Tehran to curb its suspect nuclear weapons programme and abandon ambitions for regional expansion.
Robert Gates, the new US defence secretary, said yesterday: "I don't know how many times the president, secretary [of state Condoleezza] Rice and I have had to repeat that we have no intention of attacking Iran." But Vincent Cannistraro, a Washington-based intelligence analyst, shared the sources' assessment that Pentagon planning was well under way. "Planning is going on, in spite of public disavowals by Gates. Targets have been selected. For a bombing campaign against nuclear sites,
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
Feb. 12th.
If Ahmeddinejacket says Feb 11, I say Feb 12 due to the time difference and all.
This report was debunked on Brit Hume tonight at 6:30.
Why do we have so many double posts lately?
Nancy's plane had to have 6 articles from the same paper at different times of day!
Whassup?
Was it Churchill who said that "a governmental denial was tantamount to official confirmation?"
Well at least no one can say the Iranians were not warned...
"Was it Churchill who said that "a governmental denial was tantamount to official confirmation?"
I think it was Bismarck.
reading this socialist paper reminds me that the greatest enemy we face is not Islamic fascism but rather the Left here at home and throughout the Western world.
I know a great way to embarrass Nancy, W just announces she can use Air Force One, and he will use a small aircraft instead.
The panty-waste liberals, and the MSM love to sustain wars and revel in seeing American soldiers killed. They do this to promote their agenda.
IMO
IMO, we would still be best served by trying to oust the current government by covert actions and assisting resistance groups. Internal security in Iran is nothing like it is here in the States. If resistance groups and agents are equipped right, they could cause major problems for the government. I don't like bombing the hell out of Iran for the simple reason that it will only strengthen support for the clerics and the present government. It would be a different story if Russia, France, Germany, Britain, and the US bombed Iran's nuke sites, but that ain't gonna happen anytime soon.
what would be ideal is if iran was to make the first move
ok so who here believes that we will at some point be at war with iran?
These pukes at the Guardian are beneath contempt, the way they talk about this as if it would be some horrible act against humanity.
The movement of assets to the Gulf region is a bluff, or a way of looking like we're doing something. Maybe we'll hit Iran before W. leaves office, but it certainly won't happen soon. Let's hope that in the unlikely event we ever get the stones to do this, it won't be too damned late.
True -- getting our stuff there could conceivably tempt Iran into striking us first, which would be a rather neat way for us to take care of Achmad Nutjob, or at least his nuclear program. I don't think they'll strike first, though. Until they actually have a bomb, at least.
my ex husband is convinced that the americans will "set" up iran by staging an iranian attack ...say sinking a carrier or something else in the gulf
he also believes that 911 was an inside job and radical islam is actually the u.s. government using fear tactics to control us
isn't divorce a beautiful thing?
Oh, if Iran tried to play rough and launched a missle against American interests in the Gulf, Iraq, or the Middle East... Good bye, my whole statement went out the window. Then bomb the nuke sites, and try to nail every cleric in the government. If one nuke door opens up towards Israel, kill them. I'm just against pre-emptively launching missle/bomb strikes. Anti-government and covert forces could concievably do a lot of damage to the present regime. That's what we need to be exploring before Iran has the chance to throw missles at American interests. I tend to believe the Iranian dissidents who say that an American pre-emptive strike would be a disaster.
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.