|
Attack Iran? Why Not Just Paint Targets on the Backs of Kids Like Those on PBS's "Carrier"? by Russ Wellen | May 12, 2008 - 8:02am
snip//
However, the threat has since been kicked into a higher gear by respected security analyst Philip Giraldi, who was a former CIA officer and is now foreign policy advisor to the Ron Paul campaign.
In his latest blog at the American Conservative, "War With Iran Might Be Closer Than You Think," he writes: "There is considerable speculation and buzz in Washington today suggesting that the National Security Council has agreed in principle to proceed with plans to attack an Iranian al-Qods-run camp {near Tehran} that is believed to be training Iraqi militants."
"Secretary of Defense Robert Gates," he adds, "was the only senior official urging delay. . . . {The decision} is the direct result of concerns {over} the deteriorating situation in Lebanon, where Iranian ally Hezbollah appears to have gained the upper hand against government forces."
After contacting Iran and reading them the riot act, the White House decided that "some sort of unambiguous signal has to be sent to the Iranian leadership, presumably in the form of cruise missiles." Unambiguous, thy name is cruise missile. Of course, President Bush "will still have to give the order to launch after all preparations are made."
PBS has been running a series titled Carrier, about life aboard the USS Nimitz. Imagine Iran retaliating to an air strike by blowing a mega-tub like this, along with its crew of over 5,000 mostly young people, out of the water? Iran's state-of-the-art Shahab-3 missiles are able to reach parts of the Arabian Sea and even the Mediterranean.
In other words, not only is the Persian Gulf, but total war, a hop, skip and a jump away. _______
|