Iran, perceiving threat from West, willing to attack on U.S. soil, U.S. intelligence report finds

Washington Post ^ | January 31 | Greg Miller

[LucianOfSamasota]

U.S. intelligence agencies believe that Iran is prepared to launch terrorist attacks inside the United States in response to perceived threats from America and its allies, the U.S. spy chief said Tuesday.

Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. said in prepared testimony that an alleged Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington that was uncovered last year reflects an aggressive new willingness within the upper ranks of the Islamist republic to authorize attacks against the United States.

[LucianOfSamasota]

And I thought these guys were our biggest fans. You mean that "Great Satan' stuff was personal?

A September 28, 2011 Debka article has this quote "A British diplomat ending his term in Pyongyang quoted North Korean officials who told him that NATO would not have attacked Libya if Muammar Qaddafi had not given up his nuclear weapons. Tehran appears to have reached the same conclusion."

Nice to know our State department is on top of things...

[TSgt]

"Iran isn't a threat! They just want peaceful nuclear power!"

[musicman]

Help End The Obama Era In 2012
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help Keep FR In the Battle!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!

[LibFreeUSA]

U.S. should threaten to regime-change them with the Shah’s son.

Actually, treating them like they treated Germany during WWII would be good for starters.

[MaxMax]

Aww, those cute little Iranians are threatening Obama.
Obama better go over there and have a beer summit.

[Da Coyote]

Logic would indicate that our “threats” will be more than perceived should Iran actually attack.

Although, one never knows whilst we’re under the rule of the bottom dwelling Cretin-in-Chief.

[mkjessup]

Wow, those pesky Iranians are really something eh?

I sure hope they aren’t crazy enough to lie in wait outside 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington for 0bama’s executive motorcade to exit the White House complex, you don’t think they would try to use shoulder fired missiles or something like that do you?

That would be tragic.

[LucianOfSamasota]

I think they are more likely to vote for him.

As long as he is in office attacking our allies, dismantling our military, and schmoozing our enemies they have it made.

They can’t risk another Bush - someone who might actually stand up to them.

[combat_boots]

Oh. I’d be happy if we went Carthage on them. Or Merv.

[himno hero]

Herr Coyotee,
You are right. As long as the marxomuslim is there, he will continue to sugarcoat , pillow and mask the Islamic threat that has harassed western man for the last 1400 years. Its unfortunate that the stupid masses in America fail to see the Ghazi in our White House for what he is.

Propaganda being propaganda, and all things aside Obama did the right thing backing the MB for their drive in expanding “democracy” throughout the Arab spring and right up Egypts butt. And, then employing American and NATO assets for freedom and democracy in Libya.... only demonstrates his arrogant ability to laugh at Americans with his brethren.

To see him in jail tomorrow wouldn’t be soon enough!

[D-fendr]

Gee, what was their first clue?

[mkjessup]

They can’t risk another Bush - someone who might actually stand up to them.

What are you talkin' about?

Iran HAS another Bush, i.e., 0bama who is doing exactly what Bush did in regards to the Iranian threat (and the North Korean threat), which is absolutely nothing.

You don't remember all that chest-thumpin' about the "Axis of Evil" aka Iraq, Iran and North Korea? But a funny thing happened on the way to VT Day (Victory over Terror), after GWB took out Saddam like the garbage he was, he lost all interest in going after the other two legs of that 'Axis', oh he talked the talk about "not permitting Iran to obtain a nuclear weapons capability" but he failed to walk the walk, and he ignored the advice of noneother than John Bolton and Dick Cheney who were certainly in a position to know that if we didn't take out the Iranian nuclear program in it's embryonic stages that it would be even more difficult to do so later, especially with an Islam-coddling POS in the White House like we have now. And to validate this, you can find plenty of recent news articles about the need for the U.S. to develop a more effective 'bunker busting' weapon that can even REACH the Iranian nuke facilities buried deep underground, do you think those facilities had been finished up and populated in say, December 2008 when Bush still had a window of opportunity to go after Iran and neuter their nuclear aspirations?

And don't even get me started about how Bush was an utter f--kup regarding North Korea, he was so focused on getting those ill-fated 'Six Party Talks' on track that he took North Korea OFF the list of terrorist supporting nations, and that was after he met with the famous North Korean defector Kang Chol-Hwan, author of the 'Aquariums of Pyongyang', detailing his family's imprisonment in Kim Jong Il's concentration camp system, oh Bush spent a sizable amount of time discussing with Kang Chol-Hwan how best to help the North Korean people in their suffering, and sure enough: Bush chose to cozy back up to Kim Jong Il with his foolish move to legitimize Pyongyang by delisting them as terrorist supporters.

The whole reason America and the West are now facing the prospect of a nuclear armed Iran AND a reinvigorated North Korea under Kim Jong Un, is because of ONE man, George W. Bush who totally screwed the pooch by taking no action whatsoever and just passing those issues on to his asswipe successor.

Thanks George. Thanks for NOTHING.

[crosshairs]

Actually, if it happens over here again, the people vigilantes will take care of our muzzie problem once and for all. Until the head muzzie in the WH declares Martial Law.

[Ancesthntr]

Well, if they want to attack us here on our own territory, they just need to be aware of the consequences:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WVTSHeL6Xo

[LucianOfSamasota]

I always felt that GWB had lost the Congressional support necessary to start another war after Iraq and Afghanistan, (when Presidents still honored the War Powers Act). I remember tremendous opposition starting with the “Bush lied” campaign when we didn’t find WMD’s in Iraq. I hoped that Bush would deal with Iran - possibly with Israeli help - but 2006 was a definite vote of ‘no confidence’ by the American people. So it looked to me as if GWB’s hands were tied as far as taking out another Axis of Evil member.

In any event, GWB didn’t bow or apologize to the b*st**rds.

[Forward the Light Brigade]

Iran will attack—but do it in such a way it can be traced back to them. Look to see assassinations, Terrorist bomb threats in low profile targets— Look to see attacks on out electric grid and information network—A worm or virus attack. They want Obama to stay in power—hes weak and will never attack them. They may target GOP or capitalists. They might hit oil pipelines—or start fires. We are such an open society we offer many targets. I fear that these nut jobs might really do something.

[Vinnie]

Amen. I was just going to write ‘Let the good ol boys handle the domestic terrorism problem’.

[mkjessup]

I always felt that GWB had lost the Congressional support necessary to start another war after Iraq and Afghanistan, (when Presidents still honored the War Powers Act).

FRiend, Bush had 90 days to take action at any time he chose to do so, and after McStain threw the election to 0bama in November 2008, he had a window of opportunity that began election night until 19 January 2009. He again did NOTHING. He didn't need any Congressional approval as long as he was within that 90 day window of the War Powers Act. And it would have taken a lot less than 90 days to turn the Iranian military-industrial-nuclear infrastructure into rubble with lots o' dead Islamofascists buried underneath.

I remember tremendous opposition starting with the “Bush lied” campaign when we didn’t find WMD’s in Iraq. I hoped that Bush would deal with Iran - possibly with Israeli help - but 2006 was a definite vote of ‘no confidence’ by the American people. So it looked to me as if GWB’s hands were tied as far as taking out another Axis of Evil member.

Let's not make excuses for his failure to act. Bush would not have faced as much 'tremendous opposition' if he had gotten up off his dead ass and FOUGHT BACK against the liars, naysayers and 'Rats in general who were pummeling him at will. Bush's mistake is that he allowed his enemies to define him, and just like that demented idiot John McCain, Bush was too worried about being liked by his adversaries, more concerned about "reaching across the aisle" and we can all see how the bastards paid him back.

In any event, GWB didn’t bow or apologize to the b*st**rds.

Oh we can all in retrospect feel much more secure about that.

[LucianOfSamasota]

He didn't need any Congressional approval as long as he was within that 90 day window of the War Powers Act.

So you were all onboard with 0bama's Libyan adventure? I prefer the rule of law (as did GWB apparently). Iran is a larger enemy than Iraq - which wasn't finished in 90 days. Unless you think they would have rolled over from airstrikes? We could have nuked them, I suppose. But I don't think that the President should nuke countries without Congressional approval except in emergency (imminent war, preventative strike, retaliatory strike, etc.) And there is that whole constitutional thing about involving Congress in the declaration of war - for those of us that care about the constitution.

Bush would not have faced as much 'tremendous opposition' if he had gotten up off his dead ass and FOUGHT BACK against the liars, naysayers and 'Rats in general who were pummeling him at will.

Like Cain did? or Palin? Or Bachman? We no longer control the press, and its a large reason that we're about to lose our Republic. I have not seen any conservative who has been able to defend himself when they begin their lie and smear campaigns. And they never went after anyone as much as they did GWB, (remember Bush derangement syndrome?)

There are many things I didn't agree with Bush on - such as TARP and nation-building. But overall he was a Godly man who did a lot of good when he was outnumbered and surrounded. He may very well have been the last Christian conservative who will ever reach the Presidency, so I'm not ready to join the liberal mob in blaming everything on GWB.

[mkjessup]

He didn't need any Congressional approval as long as he was within that 90 day window of the War Powers Act.
So you were all onboard with 0bama's Libyan adventure?

This isn't about 0bama's actions regarding Libya. The fact is, as long as any President conducts military operations inside of 90 days, they don't require congressional approval.

I prefer the rule of law (as did GWB apparently).

The rule of law in this instance is defined by the War Powers Act. It gives any President up to 90 days to pretty much do as they damn well please before Congress either steps in and endorses and authorizes further military action, or cuts the purse strings and says "game over".

Iran is a larger enemy than Iraq - which wasn't finished in 90 days. Unless you think they would have rolled over from airstrikes?

Between air strikes and our naval capabilities in the Gulf, the Iranian military would have ceased to exist inside of one week had we dropped the hammer on them. Believe that.

We could have nuked them, I suppose. But I don't think that the President should nuke countries without Congressional approval except in emergency (imminent war, preventative strike, retaliatory strike, etc.)

I got news for you. The President doesn't need, nor should he need, to 'consult Congress' when it comes to authorizing the use of nuclear weapons. That is the President's domain and you might want to consider studying what is known as "SIOP" (nuclear war plans) and you will find that there is NO slot or position reserved or designated for the Congress to approve or disapprove. The authority to approve nuclear strikes of any variety lies with the President and the President alone.

And there is that whole constitutional thing about involving Congress in the declaration of war - for those of us that care about the constitution.

That is an admirable view and I commend it, unfortunately that train left the station when Truman responded to the North Korean invasion of South Korean under the flag of the United Nations as a 'police action' back in 1950. That set the precedent and regretfully it will be a cold day in Hell before any present or future President will trot down to the Congress to ask for a Declaration of War. Regardless of what political party holds the Executive or Legislative branches of government, my prediction is: he wouldn't get it.

Sorry, we'll just have to disagree.