| Author | Message | | Alpha | | Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 7:39 pm Post subject: Military Attack against Iran Now Imminent |
| Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:04:53 -0800
From: "Jeff Blankfort" <jblankfort@earthlink.net>
Subject: War within Range? Another Neocon beats the drums for war and says it will happen in 10 weeks
On a right-wing Israeli radio station, neocons Kenneth Timmerman and Carl Limbacher now say that US and Israel will attack Iran in 10 weeks. Why is the neocons/American Jewish establishment the only sector in US society pushing for a confrontation with Iran? And why with Iraq before that? The war on Iraq is proving to be the worst foreign policy disaster in US history and the evidence is ample that it was a war that fit into the PNAC projection of the American global empire with Israel running the Middle East, as well as the Clean Break document drawn up in 1996 by neocons Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and Merav Wurmser for Benjamin Netanyahu which called for regime changes in Iraq, Iran and Syria, not because of any threats from those countries, but to extend Israel's power in the region. Even though this information is no longer a secret, the major pundits of the left have ignored it, absolving Israel and its lobbyists from any responsibility for the Iraq debacle. It is fair to say they have helped to pave the way or clear the air space now for an attack on Iran which will most assuredly have such horrendous results as to make the situation in Iraq seem like a garden party.
If there are truly elites who are pulling the strings in Washington and control Tel Aviv, as we are often told, there will be no attack because those elites would certainly be aware of the consequences it will have for the free-market capitalist system that they cherish. If there is an attack, it will be yet another proof that Washington is Israel's most important occupied territory, despite the efforts of a handful of brave individuals there to expose and bring a halt to the Israelization of US Middle East policy. I don't like the concept of elites, but I do not think there will be an attack and that the drum beats are designed to scare Iran because there are no other realistic options available. Nevertheless, beware the Ides of March.
This article was written two weeks ago,
http://www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=96976
http://www.kentimmerman.com/2006_01_05frontpage-iran.htm
A high-risk game of nuclear chicken
http://www.sibernews.com/the-news/world-news/a-high%11risk-game-of-nuclear-chicken-200601313615/
Military Attack against Iran Now Imminent :
http://www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=96976
On A7radio: Military Attack against Iran Now Imminent
10:36 Jan 20, '06 / 20 Tevet 5766
A7 Radio's "The Tovia Singer Show"
World renowned investigative reporter and terror expert Kenneth R. Timmerman, author of the bestselling book "Countdown to Crisis: the Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran," and Carl Limbacher, reporter for NewMax.com, reveal that the US and Israel will destroy Iran's nuclear facilities in less than 10 weeks from now.
Last edited by Alpha on Sat Feb 04, 2006 8:02 pm; edited 2 times in total | |  | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 8:37 pm Post subject: Ex-Pentagon man gets 12 years in AIPAC case |
| Why do we have find out about this from an Israeli newspaper as the serving Israel first US press/media isn't touching it from what I have seen thus far:
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/672973.html:
Ex-Pentagon man gets 12 years in AIPAC case
By Shmuel Rosner, Haaretz Correspondent in Washington and AP
WASHINGTON - Former Pentagon analyst Larry A. Franklin was sentenced Friday to a 12 years and seven months imprisonment for passing classified information to former American Israel Public Affairs Committee lobbyists.
Franklin was also found guilty of sharing classified information with Israeli diplomat Naor Gilon. He was also fined $10,000.
In sentencing Franklin, U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III said the facts of the case led him to believe that Franklin was motivated primarily by a desire to help the United States, not harm it.
Advertisement
Franklin, 59, had worked with top Pentagon officials, including former undersecretary of defense for policy Douglas Feith, and is an expert on Iraq and Iran.
Franklin pleaded guilty in October in a plea bargain, and will testify in the trial of former AIPAC lobbyists Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman slated to start in April 2005. Franklin's sentence could be then further reduced because of his cooperation with the government.
Rosen and Weissman, who are facing charges of disclosing confidential information to Israel, were fired from AIPAC in 2004.
The judge said that Franklin believed the National Security Council was insufficiently concerned with the threat posed by an unspecified Middle Eastern nation. Franklin thought leaking information might eventually persuade the Security Council to take more serious action, he said.
While the Middle Eastern country was not named in the court record, sources and the facts of the case point to Iran.
Ellis said he viewed Franklin's case differently than a case involving information leaked to the Soviets at height of the Cold War.
"But not different to the extent of excuse. Not at all," Ellis said.
Franklin at one time worked for Feith, then the Pentagon's No. 3 official, on issues involving the Middle East. During a court appearance last year, Franklin said he would occasionally be questioned directly by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and former top Pentagon official Paul Wolfowitz on policy issues.
As a result, Franklin said, he sometimes took classified information home to stay up to speed. One of the charges to which he pleaded guilty was unlawful retention of classified national defense information.
Franklin admitted that he met periodically with Rosen and Weissman between 2002 and 2004 and discussed classified information, including information about potential attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq.
Rosen and Weissman would subsequently share what they learned with reporters and Israeli officials.
Rosen was a top lobbyist for Washington-based AIPAC for more than 20 years, and Weissman was the organization's top Iran expert. AIPAC fired them in April and says it has cooperated with the investigation.
Prosecution attorneys said Friday in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia they would consider releasing the court from federal sentencing guidelines once Franklin completes his cooperation in the case against Rosen and Weissman.
Franklin asked that he be allowed to serve his sentence at a minimum security prison near his home.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treason at high level: Pentagon Zionists, AIPAC and Israel:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2004/09/08/treason-in-high-places-pentagon-zionists-aipac-and-israel.php | | | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2006 6:21 am Post subject: USNews.com: Mortimer B. Zuckerman on Moscow's mad gamble to |
| Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 21:27:49 -0800
From: "Jeff Blankfort" <jblankfort@earthlink.net>
Subject: USNews.com: Mortimer B. Zuckerman on Moscow's mad gamble to help Iran with its nuclear ambitions (1/30/06)
"Military action, such as bombing the Iranian plants with cruise missiles and strike aircraft, would be justified in the circumstances. But that is hugely difficult politically, and covert action is very difficult operationally.
"Still, the risks may have to be taken because the alternative is so awful. There may now be a window of opportunity for effective preventive action, but this window is more likely to be measured in months than years." MORTIMER ZUCKERMAN
Zuckerman, who also owns the NY Post and the Atlantic Monthly, was formerly the chair of the Conference on Presidents of the Major Jewish American Organizations. In the buildup to the Iraq war he was once of the first to call for the overthrow of Saddam in a war the the lobby fully supported. Now, having paid no price or even a mention for his role in that disaster, he is once again part of a Zionist full court press to push the US into another, potentially much more devastating war, an effort that is hardly a secret. Why is there NO discussion of this among the leading spokespersons of the left? Does the spurious charge of "anti-semitism" still have their tongues still tied in knots?
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/articles/060130/30edit.htm | | | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:59 am Post subject: Iran and the jaws of a trap |
| http://www.atimes.com
SPEAKING FREELY
Iran and the jaws of a trap
By Paul Levian
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click here if you are interested in contributing.
Judging from the rather frantic behind-the-scenes efforts of Russia and China in Iran, they seem to appreciate that the Iranian leadership is in for a big and probably deadly surprise. The Bush administration has not only handled its Iran dossier much more skillfully than Iraq, but also managed to set up Iran for a war it can neither win nor fight to a draw.
If the Iranian leaders think they can deter an attack because the
US is bogged down in Iraq they are already between the jaws of a well-set trap. Though a Western war against Iran will be a big geopolitical defeat for Russia and China, they cannot but resign themselves to this outcome if they are unable to convince the Iranians to accept the Russian proposal - ie uranium enrichment in Russia.
The Russians saw the writing on the wall when France, Germany and Britain began to march in lockstep with the United States. In particular, the widely but wrongly discounted nuclear belligerence of President Jacques Chirac last month implied that France was ready to accept the US use of nuclear weapons in a war against Iran if they saw fit to do so.
The Iranian leadership's obvious confidence in its ability to deter the US, Britain and Israel seems to rest on mainly four assumptions. Iran is militarily much stronger than Iraq, much larger, its terrain more difficult, its society more cohesive - thus more difficult to defeat, to occupy and to pacify. In addition, President Mahmud Ahmadinejad seems to take particular comfort from the widely anticipated wave of popular outrage and anti-Western attacks in the wider Middle East if Iran should be attacked.
Moreover, the economic costs of a war against Iran in terms of the price of oil and the interruption of the Iranian supply would propel the world economy into a tailspin. And finally, Iranian leaders seem to accept at face value the US moans over its overstretched military forces and the demoralization of US forces in Iraq.
Certainly, Iranian misconceptions are helped mightily by the defeatism of the Western debate about such a war. "No good options" has become something like the consensus view: an airborne and special forces "surgical strike" (as well as a massive attack) against the Iranian nuclear industry and military targets could at best delay its nuclear program and will be followed by retaliation in Iraq, Lebanon etc; a ground attack is out of the question because most of deployable US ground forces are desperately busy in Iraq.
If such things could be planned, one might be persuaded to consider this debate as an aspect of strategic deception. In fact, the US and British forces in Iraq and in the Persian Gulf as well as the forces in Afghanistan are quite able to redeploy on short notice, for example during the days of an initial air campaign against Iran for large-scale operations against the remaining Iranian forces and can be reinforced during the war. The US military infrastructure at the borders of Iran has a very substantial capability to deal with surge requirements.
The somewhat standard scenario for this war - as indicated by Chinese and Russian war games - has the following features:
An initial Israeli air attack against some Iranian nuclear targets, command and control targets and Shahab missile sites. Iran retaliates with its remaining missiles, tries to close the Gulf, attacks US naval assets and American and British forces in Iraq. If Iranian missiles have chemical warheads (in fact or presumed), the US will immediately use nuclear weapons to destroy the Iranian military and industrial infrastructure. If not, an air campaign of up to two weeks will prepare the ground campaign for the occupation of the Iranian oil and gas fields.
Mass mobilization in Iraq against US-British forces will be at most a nuisance - easily suppressed by the ruthless employment of massive firepower. And Israel will use the opportunity to deal with Syria and South Lebanon, and possibly with its Palestinian problem.
The character of this war will be completely different from the Iraq war. No show-casing of democracy, no "nation-building", no journalists, no Red Cross - but the kind of war the United States would have fought in North Vietnam if it had not had to reckon with the Soviet Union and China.
Paul Levian is a former German intelligence officer.
--------------------------------------
Rumsfeld says military force option against Iran:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2006/02/07/rumsfeld-says-military-force-option-against-iran-for-israel.php | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
