Rice: Iran must halt nuclear program

[Tyler Durden]

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/02/09/rice/


BRUSSELS, Belgium (CNN) -- U.S.
Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice said on Wednesday that Iran
must live up to its international
obligations to halt its nuclear
program or "the next steps are in
the offing."

"And I think everybody understands what the
'next steps' mean," Rice told reporters after a
meeting with NATO foreign ministers and
European Union officials.

YEEEHAWWW! We gonna open up a can a whupass on more a' them thar TOWELHEADS!

Jesus tap dancing CHRIST, I GOT to get OUT of this FUCKING NIGHTMARE of a LOOSE CANNON DICTATORSHIP.

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. So we are on schedule for war, aren't we Dr Rice?

[gWbush is Mabus]

7. it's not on the table "at this time" ............but it is on next week!!!

[SammyBlue]

20. Shut the fuck up, Dr Gap!

Go to the Dentist and get those teeth fixed. Take Ol' Yellowstain Wolfowitz with you to get his teeth cleaned!

Shut the hell up, Chest thumper! Be a fucking diplomat. What a fucking disgrace you are!

[no_to_war_economy]

64. great insight here ..

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7147.htm

snip> The Gulf is nothing but a large lake, with one narrow outlet, and most of its northern shore, i.e., Iran, consists of mountainous terrain that affords a commanding tactical advantage over ships operating in Gulf waters. The rugged northern shore makes for easy concealment of coastal defenses, such as mobile missile launchers, and also makes their detection problematic

The US Navy has never faced anything in combat as formidable as the Sunburn missile. But this will surely change if the US and Israel decide to wage a so-called preventive war against Iran to destroy its nuclear infrastructure. Storm clouds have been darkening over the Gulf for many months.

The US ships in the Gulf will already have come within range of the Sunburn missiles and the even more-advanced SS-NX-26 Yakhonts missiles, also Russian-made (speed: Mach 2.9; range: 180 miles) deployed by the Iranians along the Gulf’s northern shore. Every US ship will be exposed and vulnerable. When the Iranians spring the trap, the entire lake will become a killing field.

Armed with their Russian-supplied cruise missiles, the Iranians will close the lake’s only outlet, the strategic Strait of Hormuz, cutting off the trapped and dying Americans from help and rescue. The US fleet massing in the Indian Ocean will stand by helplessly, unable to enter the Gulf to assist the survivors or bring logistical support to the other US forces on duty in Iraq. Couple this with a major new ground offensive by the Iraqi insurgents, and, quite suddenly, the tables could turn against the Americans in Baghdad. As supplies and ammunition begin to run out, the status of US forces in the region will become precarious. The occupiers will become the besieged…

[prabtahoe2005]

70. Iran War Plan Is Being Updated

Today's (2/10/05) Washington Post reports that the the US Military is updating the Iran war plan...

U.S. Military Says Update Of Iran War Plan Is Routine

By Ann Scott Tyson

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.

[VegasWolf]

2. or what? Will she cry? n/t

[Earth_First]

3. "And I think everybody understands what the 'next steps' mean,"

:nuke:

[lebkuchen]

4. Iran: "Sure, if the US leads by example." nt

[Vitruvius]

51. The US sponsored Saddam Hussein's invasion of Iran, costing over a

MILLION Iranian dead (many from the poison gas we gave Saddam to use in his invasion) -- and now Bu$h has the brass nerve to tell the Iranians that they shouldn't build nuclear weapons to protect themselves? Bastard.

[justinsb]

5. Again, please help put a stop to the insanity

http://www.petitiononline.com/NWinIran/petition.html

[aden_nak]

6. I bet George got a hard on just hearing her say that.

Okay. . . now I need to go wash my brain out with bleach.

[bunkerbuster1]

19. When they're alone..

she pronounces it "Nookyoulur."

Just for hubby.

[Mr_Spock]

8. Shut up you incompetent liar.

This smarmy liar needs to shut up NOW!

[yorkiemommie1]

9. evil witch

some diplomacy.

[VegasWolf]

10. PNAC does not have the BALLS to attack Iran without some

semblence of a coalition of world partners agreeing. And
PNAC won't get that agreement. Trying to sell the WMD story a second
time will be too difficult.

[Minstrel Boy]

12. It's not about balls, it's about ideological mania.

And they have plenty to spare.

It'll happen.

[Tyler Durden]

13. This is their excuse for the DRAFT.

Can't you hear it now: "Iraq would have if they could, but Iran WILL because they CAN!"

Like Woody Allen said; if Jesus came back, he would never stop vomiting.

[MuddyBootStrap]

31. Who is calling for a draft now?

The last time I saw a call for a draft is was one or more of our Democrats making the call. Is this still true or has a repub stepped up to ask for a draft?

[LynnTheDem]

47. Dems calling for a draft so our poor soldiers aren't doing 3 and 4 YEARS

at a time in war zones for bush's total bullshit.

If you want ALL WAR ALL THE TIME, then JOIN UP. Why should just our soldiers be BACKDOOR DRAFTED and CONSCRIPTED?

[Skittles]

71. OUR?

lol

[YDogg]

14. Agreed ...

... it's not about balls.

[VegasWolf]

42. I KNOW it's not about BALLS. It is about money, political will in

the absence of a coalition, a military already overextended,
an administration still trying to borrow money fro China
for past follies. IT will not happen!

[RaleighNCDUer]

15. They don't have to.

All they have to do is get Israel to drop some of those bunker-busters we gave them on Iran's suspected nuke sites. When Iran retaliates, we move in defense of our ally, the only democracy in the middle-east.

Why do you think Sharon is pulling out of Gaza? There will be a shit-storm, and the small settlements there would be indefensible.

Rummy has been itching for a chance to use the new mini-nukes, and show Korea that it can't fuck with us.

[LynnTheDem]

48. WE move in??? Who's this "WE", Kemosabe??? As in "WHAT ARMY?"

Are the chickenshit cowardly rightwingnuts gonna sign up? HELL NO. Let's draft the bastards and let them invade & try to occupy Iran. Not a chance in hell America would succeed in occupying Iran but hey, we'd clear up the rightwingnut mess.

[Vitruvius]

26. The PNAC chickenhawks don't need any balls to send OTHER PEOPLE

to attack Iran; like they did with Iraq.

[VegasWolf]

43. They don't have the resources! I'm taking bets! n/t

[Lorien]

44. No, but they do have the stupidity.

remember, facts mean NOTHING to these nutjobs. We don't have the money, or the troops, or even a decent excuse to attack Iran, but that won't stop them. They're hoping that unemployment and low wages will drive the "lesser classes" into joining the military. If that doesn't work, there WILL be a draft.

If they insist on such a misadventure, things will spiral out of control quickly, and even the whore press will have a hard time covering for their mega-blunders.

[cliss]

59. You hit the nail right on the head.

D-R-A-F-T. That's what this is all about.

I recall reading an article on this very topic, about 3 months ago. Sorry, I can't remember the author, but I'm sure I can find it again. He said that the US was going to reinstate the draft.

He said to watch for the rhetoric to start escalating around late December of 2004. This would be rhetoric against Iran. The White House would start steadily escalating the rhetoric against Khatami.

He said that was a sure sign that the draft is next.

My God if it isn't exactly the way he described it.

[Tyler Durden]

11. Can you believe this is actually going to happen AGAIN???

These motherfuckers have got CHUTZPAH flowing from them like santorum out of the ass of a "$2 a pop" hustler.

[mattclearing]

16. Excellent usage of "santorum"

Dan Savage would be proud.

[murray hill farm]

17. And the amazing thing is that...

They are playing it the same way!! Said this morning that there was a thin line..or something to that effect..between peaceful uses and military uses of nuclear energy...and that we wont know when Iran would cross that line..or, again..something to that effect. It is that ole...might or are capable or whatever of developing WMD...and what is all this shit about UN sanctions? Sanctions for what??? Iran is not breaching any international laws to develop nuclear energy? Do they really think they can play this same game again..using the same rationales. Where does it end? NO...dont answer that..i know, but dont want to hear it.

[dxdem]

18. Do I hear drums? n/t

[donheld]

21. I'm sure, like Iraq, it will be war reguardless of what they do

Once these thugs get it in their heads to go to war, nothing stops them.

[Canuckistanian]

22. OOOOoooo, they're shaking now....

Sic 'em Condi!

[Hand]

23. Iran sez...

Right you are, ma'am! We'll get right on it! In yr DREAMS, lady...

[daleo]

24. They are really rolling out the "Iran threat" product lately

Rice, Rummy, Bush in the last few days, at a minimum. It is funny, though, it doesn't sound like Bush is really the driving force. He just seems to play along like the rest. You wonder who is pulling the strings.

[mountainvue]

25. "Fool me once..." n/t

[NYC Liberal]

27. Iran: "We will if you do."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52564-2005Jan31.html| Rumsfeld Seeks to Revive Burrowing Nuclear Bomb>

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld sent a memo last month to then-Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham saying next year's budget should include funds to resume study of building an earth-penetrating nuclear weapon designed to destroy hardened underground targets.

An Energy Department official said yesterday that $10.3 million to restart that study is expected to be included in the Bush administration's budget, which is to be released next week.

The study, which had been undertaken at the Los Alamos, Sandia and Livermore national laboratories, was halted late last year after Congress deleted $27.5 million for it from the fiscal 2005 Omnibus Appropriations Bill.

The research project was started in 2002 as a three-year effort to see if an existing nuclear warhead could be fitted with a hardened casing allowing it to dig deep into the earth before exploding. The program has been restricted each year by Senate and House members who have argued that even studying the potential for such a new nuclear weapon undermines Washington's attempts to limit other countries from developing their own nuclear arsenals.

[teryang]

28. This is the second of a series of incremental steps

...that will lead to a huge war. It is confusing to Europeans because the appeasement inclinations are stronger than ever because they have so much more to lose. Disdaining the Americans, disapproving of their foreign policy, trying to head them off diplomatically, all pale in comparison to the will and sacrifices necessary to stop their military aggression. No one in Europe has the stomach for this. It's like selling Hitler's plans to his prospective victims.

It's going to fall to one or more Asian powers to finance the military opposition. I predict the opposition will be indirect by opening fronts elsewhere to challenge American interests where they are already weak. Covertly supporting direct resistance to American inroads with money and material will also be another strategy.

At this point everyone appears to be biding their time thinking that they can strengthen their position and maybe market share by acting as if nothing is profoundly amiss.

[cliss]

65. You're right.

I recall reading an article about 3 months ago. I wish I could remember the writer, because he said that the US plans to reinstate the draft.

He wrote that the key proof of this would be that the US will start escalating its rhetoric against Iran. It would start at the beginning of the year (Jan. '05) and would start steadily escalating.

Sure enough, that's exactly what we're seeing.

Now as far as financing the opposition, I think you're right that Asia will step up to the plate. Also, Russia announced recently that it will sell missiles to Iran. The thread is somewhere on the LBN. They are also making it public, so that there will be no doubts about the hazards involved.

Some people are writing that they are bringing on Armageddon. That may be so, but it's not in the Cabal's plans. They couldn't care less what people think. They are out after complete dominance of the Middle East.

At this point, there are only 2 countries left which are not US puppets: Syria and Iran.

[winston61]

29. if you think Iraq is a mess...

Iran will be the mother of all nightmares. As soon as the Israelis drop the first bomb, the shit will hit the fan. Iran is five times larger than Iraq, how are we going to occupy a country that size? Do you think the Iranians are just sitting around waiting for the next shoe to drop?
The neocons think that the Iranians will rise up against the Mullahs and demand more of George's 'democracy'. Wait a minute, didn't George I think the Iraqis would overthrow Saddam in '91? Let's see, what happened to those folks? Let's bring this home for a second. If we here in the U.S. are invaded, do you really give a shit about your neighbor's religion? Would we not all, liberal and conservative unite against our common foe? God, we are living in a country run by aggressive simpletons and they are going to cause the end of the world.

[RaleighNCDUer]

52. That's the whole idea, isn't it?

These people pray for Armageddon. They believe they are in the end times, and something like 20% of Americans believe it will come in their lifetimes.

Insanity.

[paula777]

30. Iraq weapons inspector urges caution on Iran (Kay and Carter respond)

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/02/09/kay.iran/index.html


Kay, Carter urge caution on Iran
Former weapons inspector: 'It's deja vu all over again'
Wednesday, February 9, 2005 Posted: 5:51 PM EST (2251 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Former U.S. chief weapons inspector David Kay urged the United States on Wednesday not to make the same mistakes with Iran that he said it made with Iraq ahead of the second Persian Gulf War.

Former President Jimmy Carter, meanwhile, said that even a pre-emptive strike against Iran's nuclear facilities "would not be successful," but he agreed with U.S. officials who have demanded more transparency from the Islamic republic.

In Belgium on Wednesday, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Iran must live up to its international obligations to halt its nuclear program or "the next steps are in the offing."

"It's obvious that if Iran cannot be brought to live up to its international obligations that, in fact, the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) statutes would suggest that Iran has to be referred to the U.N. Security Council," she told reporters after meeting NATO foreign ministers and European Union officials.

"The message is there, the Iranians need to get that message, and we can certainly always remind them that there are other steps that the international community has at its disposal should they not be prepared to live up to these obligations," the secretary of state said. (Full story)

Kay told CNN he is worried because he's hearing some of the same signals about Iran and its nuclear program that were heard as the Bush administration made its case for the war in Iraq.

"It's deja vu all over again," Kay said. "You have the secretary of defense talking about the problems of a nuclear-armed Iran. You have the vice president warning about a nuclear-armed Iran and terrorism; you have Condoleezza Rice saying, 'Force is not on the agenda -- yet.' "

Kay said that much like what happened before the U.S.-invasion of Iraq in March 2003, most of the information concerning Iran's weapons program and capabilities is coming from dissidents who would like to see regime change.

As he put in a column in Monday's Washington Post, "There is an eerie similarity to the events preceding the Iraq war."

The Bush administration has also recently suggested that the matter of Iran's nuclear program be referred to the U.N. Security Council -- much as it demanded a resolution that Iraq give up its alleged weapons of mass destruction or face military action. Such weapons were never found in Iraq.

"It's amazing that we're talking about military action against Iran and we don't have a national intelligence estimate that shows what we do know, what we don't know and the basis for what we think we know," Kay told CNN.

Kay, who served as a U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq in the first Gulf War and as the chief U.S. inspector in the second war, said he has no doubt that Iran does have nuclear ambitions.

"The IAEA has now produced damning proof that for 18 years they cheated on their nuclear obligations," he said.

"But that doesn't prove that they've taken the final step toward a nuclear weapons program. They clearly have done all the preliminary work. The challenge now is to find a diplomatic basis that will keep them from going that last mile."

Kay said the United States must try through diplomatic means to deal with Iran and shouldn't rush into military action.

"Let the failure be Iranian failure, not failure of American diplomacy," he said.

An Iran armed with nuclear weapons would be especially treacherous because of its ties to terrorism, Kay said.

"We're in a dangerous time right now," he said.

Ex-president: Attack likely would fail
Carter told CNN Wednesday that the U.S. military was "bogged down in Iraq and overextended, in my opinion."

"I think diplomacy is a proper approach," he said, "And I believe that's exactly what President Bush is doing, as announced by Condoleezza Rice."

In last week's State of the Union address, Bush said the United States is working with European allies to convince Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions and "end its support for terror."

Iran insists its nuclear activities are legal and for peaceful purposes.

"Iran is a signatory of a nonproliferation treaty," Carter said. "Israel, for instance, is not. Iran still claims -- as backed up I think by the international commission on nuclear weapons -- that they are in compliance with the nonproliferation treaty.

"I don't know what the facts are, but I think that's going to be increasingly important for the world to ascertain," he said.

"And it may be that through the United Nations Security Council, the United States, the Europeans and others will continue to put increasing pressure on Iran ... to help reveal exactly what is the status of Iran's policies."

Carter pointed out that Iran does have a right, under the nonproliferation treaty, to develop a nuclear power program and to dispose properly of the program's waste.

"Whether they're doing it legally at this point, I don't know," said the former president and Nobel Peace Prize winner.

But Carter said that a pre-emptive strike against Iran -- such as Israel's 1981 attack taking out the Osirak facility in Iraq -- would have little chance of success because most Iranian nuclear facilities are now spread over a wide area and buried deep underground.

"It would just arouse the entire Middle East again in an antagonistic response against the United States," he said.

"And I'm not sure that we are prepared militarily now to take on another war."

[twaddler01]

33. How hard can it be?

Really! How hard can it be to keep an eye on them. Are we that behind in technology that we cannot get proof of a country developing nuclear weapons? I doubt they are developing nuclear weapons, but I am just dumbfounded that we have to make assumptions without any proof.

Let's hope this won't lead to another "war without proof" as we just did not long ago. I doubt it is that difficult to get intelligence in the country with the U.S. being as advanced as we are. The only other reasoning: G.W. BUSH.

[twaddler01]

32. Iran Says Will Never Give Up Nuclear Technology

Iran Says Will Never Give Up Nuclear Technology

By Paul Hughes and Tabassum Zakaria

TEHRAN/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Iran, in a renewed challenge to U.S. and European efforts to prevent it from acquiring a nuclear bomb, vowed on Wednesday it would never give up its nuclear program.

President Mohammad Khatami (news - web sites) also warned of "massive" consequences if it was treated unfairly over its nuclear program which Iran says is for peaceful purposes only and Washington believes is a cover for producing a bomb.


"We give our guarantee that we will not produce nuclear weapons because we're against them and do not believe they are a source of power," Khatami told foreign ambassadors in Tehran.


"But we will not give up peaceful nuclear technology."

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050209/ts_nm/iran_dc

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

37. if the U.S. or Israel invades/nukes Iran-it is the end for the U.S.

The U.S will look like such conquerers to the world, they'd lose the PR campaign completely, and for good.
After the Iraq shit, countries are not going to sit back and take it lightly any more.
Iraq was sort of overlooked in a way but as Booshee says --fool me once, shame on...shame on...hmmmmm you? uhhh fool me twice....wont git fooooed agin?

And not only that, the PR campaign at home will be lost if they invade or nuke that country. The people will rise up here at home(I know, we're wimps, I admit it but we will), and then military law will be declared, opposition will be rounded up, Booshee wooshee will declare himself premanent chimp, and then....
and then,,
let the revolution begin.
Our own Fatherland ( und mine Homeland und Motherland) will make the Iraq military situation look like a picnic-
in the meantime, every country except one or two will gang up on the U.S. and there will be plenty of secret support for the internal revolt.

Condo Lizard really "ain't dat smart"-the whole reptilian mindset ideology is increasingly useless as we move further into the 21st Century.

[Redstone]

34. The "next steps mean..."

A New Dawn for Tehran...



Redstone

[Imagevision]

35. It does seem like no other countries want to join us in Iraq.

[Gyre]

36. She's got some giant fucking teeth!!!

Jest look at her. Ewwwwwww. She's always reminded me of a cannibal/landshark type of troll.

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

38. she's a bobble head on a dashboard!! CONDO LIZARD- the Reptilian

her and her reptilian bad self !!
Talk abou UUUUGly!
Ugly isn't only skin deep (or scales deep)--it's what's on the inside that's really uuugly!!

[Disturbed]

39. I don't believe that the U.S Oligarchy will allow..

the Bush Junta to attack Iran. Israel won't do so because they will be attacked by Iranian missles. I feel that a war with Iran would be devastating to the U.S. military and economy. If the Bush Junta seems as if they are going forward with an acual attack the leaders may have an accident in the sky or something along those lines.

[RaleighNCDUer]

54. Sorry, airplane accidents are restricted to Dems only.

Why do you think the expansionist, Greater Isreal leader Sharon is pulling out of Gaza? He's a military man who recognizes that you don't leave assets exposed in indefensible positions. When the shit flies, those settlements would be overrun in a heartbeat.

Israel won't act without a guarantee that the US will intervene. And we can intervene. While we may be getting gnawed on by IEDs and suicide bombers as an occupation force, we still have tremendous offensive capability. All we have to do is abandon the idea that we are an occupation, stop patrolling, withdraw to the bases and harden them and let our puppets deal with the insurgency while we gear up for the attack on Iran.

Our oligarchs are primarily oil-based. So they firmly believe that we must spread democracy to every backward country that has oil.

The junta is the oligarchs -- there is no disagreement between them.

[Red Fox]

40. It means another country without WMD is going to get it

Which means Iran is quite safe from this POV.

All those countries without WMD: beware of "the next steps"!

[devinsgram]

41. Yeah, Ms Rice, they will really listen to you, alright.

While their laughing their ass's off. Do you really think they will give a s**t what she has to say. In the Middle East they see her as non-entity.

[Barkley]

45. Has Iran Switched Euros? Are Rice's statements a 'greenlight' for Israel?

Israel could launch its Jericho ballistic missiles against Iranian sites.

This would eliminate the problem of sending Israel planes over US-controled Iraqi airspace since ballistic missile temporarily leave the atmosphere.

Iran has missiles that can reach Israel, but Israel has the Arrow ballistic missile defense system. This defense system would limit Iran's ability to retaliate.

Iran has no defense against ballistic missiles.

Sharon is now in the uncomfortable position of negotiating with Abbass
and his right-wing supporters must be very unhappy about that.

Attacking Iran would work very well domestically for Sharon.

[LynnTheDem]

46. With WHAT ARMY, rice??? You and the rightwingnut COWARDS???

I don't think so.

[Massachusetts]

49. And then yelling from the corner

are those crazy folks with the standard short hair cuts saying, "look what we have":nuke:

[Tyler Durden]

50. We won't attack with the army we WANT....

We'll Attack with the army we HAVE.

And anyone who doesn't believe that the draft is just down the block, bearing down on us like an Abrams tank, is massively deluded.

These nuts have decided they will do WHAT they want, WHEN they want, and that they don't need a fucking reason to do it.

[dandrhesse]

53. I faxed Biden this morning and would encourage other to do the same

I also faxed Lugar and asked that he join Biden in publicly rebuking Rice and the administrations approach.

Do I think either will do it? No, but they need to hear from us, they need to know what we are thinking about this, it is more important than telling each other. That is good for venting purposes, which is also important in these stressful times but they need to feel the heat from us, often :)

[Blackthorn]

55. The draft...

"The last time I saw a call for a draft is was one or more of our Democrats making the call. Is this still true or has a repub stepped up to ask for a draft?"

I don't know if this letter did the rounds here, but obviously some people haven't seen it.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/defense-20050128.htm

Letter to Congress on Increasing U.S. Ground Forces
January 28, 2005

Dear Senator Frist, Senator Reid, Speaker Hastert, and Representative Pelosi:

The United States military is too small for the responsibilities we are asking it to assume. Those responsibilities are real and important. They are not going away. The United States will not and should not become less engaged in the world in the years to come. But our national security, global peace and stability, and the defense and promotion of freedom in the post-9/11 world require a larger military force than we have today. The administration has unfortunately resisted increasing our ground forces to the size needed to meet today's (and tomorrow's) missions and challenges.

So we write to ask you and your colleagues in the legislative branch to take the steps necessary to increase substantially the size of the active duty Army and Marine Corps. While estimates vary about just how large an increase is required, and Congress will make its own determination as to size and structure, it is our judgment that we should aim for an increase in the active duty Army and Marine Corps, together, of at least 25,000 troops each year over the next several years.

There is abundant evidence that the demands of the ongoing missions in the greater Middle East, along with our continuing defense and alliance commitments elsewhere in the world, are close to exhausting current U.S. ground forces. For example, just late last month, Lieutenant General James Helmly, chief of the Army Reserve, reported that "overuse" in Iraq and Afghanistan could be leading to a "broken force." Yet after almost two years in Iraq and almost three years in Afghanistan, it should be evident that our engagement in the greater Middle East is truly, in Condoleezza Rice's term, a "generational commitment." The only way to fulfill the military aspect of this commitment is by increasing the size of the force available to our civilian leadership.

<snip>

PNAC has openly called for the draft, or something draft-like. The draft will happen, and so will Iran. Buckle up.

[VirginiaDem]

56. The US will "attack" not invade...

There are different levels of stupidity and, contrary to what many here believe, the administration is not in the 9th circle of stupidity, which is where you would have to be to invade and occupy Iran, given what is happening in Iraq.

The US and Israel, I expect, are planning an attack on Iranian facilities. That attack very well may happen because the powers that be believe that, between the two nations, they can take out most or all of the many sites believed to be part of the nuclear capacity of Iran. They probably also believe that back-channel, secret warnings not to block the Strait of Hormuz or invade Iraq "or else" will have a sufficient deterrent effect on the mullahs. I'm not so sure about that--the mullahs will retaliate in some fashion and their three "best" options will be to lob missiles at Israel, block the Strait, and/or go into Iraq in some fashion.

The administration is in about the 7th circle of stupidity, IMO, which is easily stupid enough to greenlight a preemptive attack on Iranian facilities.

[VegasWolf]

60. Then the Iranians strike back at Israel and WW3 starts. This would

be the 100th level of stupidity. Not even bush
is THAT stupid.

[Lilith Velkor]

67. Yes he is. n/t

[VirginiaDem]

72. Run me through the scenario...

how do we get from Iran striking back at Israel to WWIII? I don't mean the question facetiously--which world powers get involved when and why? If Iran strikes back at Israel (which they might not because they probably don't want to be ground zero for WW3) then Israel strikes back hard, possibly with nukes. What happens then? Is there a nuclear power that has more to gain than lose from jumping in at that stage?

Let me stress that I don't want any of this to happen--just because I think Israel/US might be able to get away with a strike without getting us into WW3 in no way means I'm for said strike. I'm just trying to think it through. If this strike does take place, more than likely (although not definitely, given what we know about this admin), the military will have signed off on it.

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

74. that logic is exactly what will promote an attack

Bottom line: Other countries are going to get involved if the U.S. or Israel invades.
Why?
Because the word is not going to sit back and allow U.S. corporate interests to control the entire oil supply in the Middle East-

Call it WW3 or 4 or call it a mess but the other World Powers aren't about to "let it slide" like they did Iraq.
Too much is at stake.

After an attack, the U.S. /and or Israel will lose the P.R campaign and lose all sympathy.
Once a Nuclear attack happens, there's instant widespread public opposition (in the world, not the "focus groups" in the U.S.)--and what does this mean?
It means trouble. No one can survive in the world without public acceptance. The will of the constituents in countries that are actually governed for the people and by the people will be forced to comply and take action. There's really no way around it.
The U.S. loses bigtime.

[bobthedrummer]

57. Does anyone have any further doubt that the neo-conservative traitors

are following PNAC? Have gun, will travel.

[hangemhigh]

58. Meanwhile, back in North Korea....

"Yup, we have nukes and nope, we ain't talking to you."

[VegasWolf]

61. Yep, they have nukes and say fuck you bush, and bush says sorry

to have troubled you.

[Az_lefty]

62. We're going to "off" Iran ?????

"the next steps are in
the offing."
:nuke:

[FlyByNight]

63. What about North Korea?

What about Pakistan, Condi?

Incompetent, boot-licking liar.

[okieinpain]

66. exactly, how the hell do you tell iran no, and let North korea slide

I like how NK, waited until they had more then a couple of them, and then they tell everybody to take a hike. It's not good that NK, and iran has nukes, (especially NK). but here lately it has been too good that we've got them too.

man, if there wasn't so much on the line, this would be the funniest shit.

[peterh]

68. The war drums are a pounding….again…

The committees are forming, ANWR is almost a done deal (just needs an extra push) and crude will hit $100…..I foresee a staged Persian Gulf incident (aka Gulf of Tonkin) and when you hear Condi mention mushroom cloud, you can take it to the bank….


DJ Group Calls For US 'Regime Change' Policy In Iran

WASHINGTON (AP)--A group of former senior government officials called on the
Bush administration Thursday to adopt an "official policy of regime change" in
Iran on the grounds that the country poses a threat to U.S. security.
The Iran Policy Committee, formed a month ago in an effort to influence
government policy toward Iran, said in a statement that Tehran's Islamic
government "is not likely to be turned from its threatening behavior by policies
that emphasize negotiations."
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice came close to advocating the ouster of the
Islamic regime in a statement last week……….

The committee is made up of former White House, State Department, Pentagon and
CIA officials.
Co-chairs include James Akins, a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia, and Paul
Levanthal, founder of the Nuclear Control Institute……

"Time is on Iran's side," the committee said. "The world cannot wait for proof
'beyond a reasonable doubt' of an Iranian bomb. The risks of delay are too
high."

(END) Dow Jones Newswires
02-10-05 1332ET(AP-DJ-02-10-05 1832GMT)

[Skittles]

69. gee, I cannot GUESS what the NEXT STEP will be

:puke:

Who wants to bet it's air strikes on supposed Iran nuclear facilities?

[SoCalDem]

73. Iran to Rice:..... "Make me"....n/t

:(