Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Israel stages massive practice attack on Iran: US increase rhetoric and tension IAEA warns of war

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 02:43 AM
Original message
Israel stages massive practice attack on Iran: US increase rhetoric and tension IAEA warns of war

Increase in tensions and the possibilty of an attack on Iran.



While the media has been commenting on Senator's Obama decision to change his earlier position and forego Public Financing of the General Election, and while the blogosphere has been consumed with strident disagreements about the best strategy and tactics on the upcoming FISA bill and its unhappy inclusion of the telecom retroactive immunity, tensions indicating a possible attack on Iran have significantly increased.

What has been particularly startling is that the normally calm Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency has used uncharacteristically strong words warning that attacks would "it will turn the Middle East to a ball of fire" and that should there be an attack that he would resign immediately. What makes this particularly noteworthy is that when Israeli forces took out a Syrian nuclear plant that was being installed from North Korea earlier in the year there was almost no reaction anywhere.


Here is a brief summary of statements and actions made in the last week:

1) On June 16th President Bush visits Prime Minister Brown (UK) in London and issues very strong language indicating that they are going to press for further sanctions against the Iranians. This follows Bush's efforts in other European countries on the same issue.

2) Sometime in the last few weeks Israel has conducted practice air strikes with up to 100 F16 and F15 warplanes involved in practice bombing exercises.

3) Russia's foreign minister makes a strong statement Friday against the use of force. Vows to press on 'non-stop'.

Actions Today
4) US Pentagon sources give multiple 'off the record' briefings confirming the details of the Israeli training exercizes.

5) Iran states that Israeli exercizes "jeopardizes global peace and security." Also accuses the United States of trying to kill or kidnap Ahmadinejad on trip to Baghdad.

6) Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency states that "In my opinion, a military strike will be the worst... it will turn the Middle East to a ball of fire," and announces he is prepared to resign if they take place.

Below please find details of the statements




1) U.S./U.K.: Brown Backs Bush On Iran



http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2008/06/ca8906d0-cd58-4377-8b47-5d0ecf4bc701.html


Gordon Brown said London would impose further economic sanctions on Iran to help persuade it to suspend its nuclear program, and he promised to set no timelines for withdrawals of his country's forces from Iraq.

"If Iran continues to ignore United resolutions, to ignore our offers of partnership, we have no choice but to intensify sanctions. And so today Britain will urge Europe and Europe will agree to take further sanctions against Iran," Brown said at a joint news conference with Bush.

"First of all, we will take action today that will freeze the overseas assets of the biggest bank in Iran, the Bank Melli, and second, action will start today for a new phase of sanctions on oil and gas," he added.

Washington wants to build European support for new sanctions against Tehran if it rejects incentives to give up uranium enrichment.

Bush's meetings in London come as Iran on June 14 ruled out suspending uranium enrichment, despite a renewed offer by the five UN permanent Security Council members and Germany to help it develop a civilian nuclear program in exchange for abandoning its enrichment efforts.


Iran has now got its answer from Brown, underlining support that Bush has already received earlier in his trip from Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. All have said they share Washington's goal of assuring Tehran does not obtain nuclear weapons.

The U.S. and European leaders hope this will add pressure on Iran to soften its approach toward the incentives offer or build international support for a third round of sanctions at the United Nations.







2)Large scale Israel training mission prepares for possible Iran strike



http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23897098-2703,00.html



ISRAELI fighter jets have recently conducted a large-scale training operation that simulated an attack on an Iranian nuclear reactor, US media reports claim.

The apparent operation follows months of escalating rhetoric from the Israeli defence establishment and politicians, who insist a military strike against the nascent nuclear capabilities of Iran is on strategists' drawing boards.

Up to 100 advanced Israeli combat jets were reported to have taken part in the drill over Greece and other areas of the eastern Mediterranean.

The exercise was tailored to prepare for long-range strikes and focused on air-to-air refuelling and target assessment, Pentagon officials told The New York Times.

The paper reported that more than 100 Israeli jets staged the manoeuvre. It said the aircraft flew more than 1440km, roughly the distance from Israel to Iran's Natanz nuclear-enrichment facility.


Asked to comment on the report, the military issued a statement saying only that the Israeli air force "regularly trains for various missions in order to confront and meet the challenges posed by the threats facing Israel".

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has said he preferred that Iran's nuclear ambitions be halted through diplomacy, but he does not rule out military action.






3)Russia warns against attacking Iran



http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1213794289495

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on Friday warned against the use of force on Iran, saying there was no proof it was trying to build nuclear weapons.



Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

Lavrov said Iran should be engaged in dialogue and encouraged to cooperate with the UN nuclear monitoring agency.

He made the statement when asked to comment on Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz's statement earlier this month that Israel could attack Iran if it does not halt its nuclear program.

"I hope the actual actions would be based on international law," Lavrov said. "And international law clearly protects Iran's and anyone else's territorial integrity."


The IDF refused to confirm or deny a New York Times report Friday that its warplanes staged a major rehearsal this month for a possible attack on Iran.

Lavrov said Russia had asked both the United States and Israel to provide factual information to back their claims that Iran was working to build atomic weapons. "So far we have seen none, and the same conclusion was made by the International Atomic Energy Agency," he said.

"It's absolutely not right to speak matter-of-factly that Iran continues building nuclear weapons," Lavrov added.

Lavrov insisted that Iran must be encouraged to continue its cooperation with the UN monitoring agency.

"As long as the IAEA reports to us progress in its relations with Iran, as long as Iran closes the issues which were of concern to the IAEA and this process continues, we should avoid any steps which could undermine this very important process," he said, speaking in English.

Russia has maintained close ties with Iran and is building its first nuclear power plant in the southern port of Bushehr, which is expected to go on line later this year. It has backed limited UN sanctions aimed at forcing Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment program, but has opposed the US push for harsher measures.

"The key to resolving the Iranian issue is involvement," Lavrov said. "We must involve Iran, engage Iran in resolving the Iranian nuclear program, ... but also engage Iran in constructive, respectful, serious dialogue on Iraq and Afghanistan, on the Middle East in general."









4) Pentagon briefs NYT and the AP with multiple sources on the Israeli Training



http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5itvrl_aTnXtjxkyqxRAqgIcKwDmQ

U.S. says Israeli military has practised attack on Iran's nuclear facilities

WASHINGTON — Pentagon officials have confirmed reports that the Israeli military has conducted a major exercise aimed at showing it's ability to attack Iran's nuclear facilities.

Two Pentagon officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, tell The Associated Press that Israel sent dozens of aircraft on a large-scale exercise in the Eastern Mediterranean early this month.







5)Iran vows to press on with nuclear development - accuses the United States of trying to kill him




http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/21/israelandthepalestinians.iran1

Tehran today denounced Israel as a "threat to global peace" after Israel held a large military exercise in an apparent dress rehearsal for a potential attack on Iranian nuclear facilities.

An Iranian government spokesman, Gholam-Hossein Elham, dismissed suggestions of an attack by Israel as "impossible", the official IRNA news agency reported.

He said "the threats and the claims of Zionist regime" proved Iran's view that Israel was "dangerous and a threat to the global peace and security".


Elham's remarks came after Pentagon officials confirmed US media reports of a large military exercise by Israel earlier this month to show Iran that it had the capacity to strike at its nuclear facilities.




Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Thursday accused the United States of plotting to kidnap and assassinate him during a visit earlier this year to Iraq, state media reported.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1213794285005&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Ahmadinejad told a meeting of clerics in the central Iranian city of Qom that Iran's "enemies" planned to kill him when he went to Baghdad in March, according to the president's Web site. Iranian leaders usually use the term "enemies" to refer to Western nations and the United States in particular.

Ahmadinejad said the plot was never carried out because of "intentional" last-minute changes in his schedule during the visit, the Web site said. He said the conspirators learned about the changes too late, when he had departed Iraq.

He did not elaborate or say how Teheran learned of the alleged plot. A senior Iraqi security official in Baghdad who was involved in Ahmadinejad's visit said the Iranian president had planned to go to the southern Shi'ite holy cities of Karbala and Najaf but these trips were canceled because of fears for his safety. It was not known if these were the changes Ahmadinejad was referring to. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk about the visit.






6)ElBaradei warns of "ball of fire" and threatens to resign.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25298744


Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency


DUBAI, United Arab Emirates - The U.N. nuclear watchdog chief warned in comments aired Saturday that any military strike on Iran could turn the Mideast to a "ball of fire" and lead Iran to a more-aggressive stance on its controversial nuclear program.

The comments by Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, came in an interview with an Arab television station aired Saturday, a day after U.S. officials said they believed recent large Israeli military exercises may have been meant to show Israel's ability to hit Iran's nuclear sites.

"In my opinion, a military strike will be the worst... it will turn the Middle East to a ball of fire," ElBaradei said on Al-Arabiya television. It also could prompt Iran to press even harder to seek a nuclear program, and force him to resign, he said.




We have a disturbing confluence of leaders in the United States and Iran that share the same penchant for playing chicken and sabre rattling.

Both Bush and Ahmadinejad appear to seek a military strike on Iran. Ironically an attack by the United States or Israel would benefit Ahmadinejad the most and may be the reason that he continues to try and provke Bush to attack. An attack would increase his lagging domestic popularity, give him stronger credentials in the radical Islamic 'street' and most importantly significantly drive up the price of petroleum, probably over $ 200 per barrel dramatically increasing Iran's oil revenues and enabling him to fund the populist programs he promised the rural areas when he was running for President.


The likelihood of McCain succumbing to Iranian provocations and launching an attack is so great and the consequences so disastorous that it should help us to focus on the Democratic party's need for solidarity and redoubling all efforts to win the General Election.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
davidpdx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 05:37 AM
Response to Original message
1. Crap...just what we DON'T need
It looks like Bush is going to use a threat of imminent war to try to help McCain get elected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cali_Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 05:56 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Yep
Expect another war or an orchestrated "terror attack" courtesy of the Bush Administration.

No way in hell do they want Obama to be president. The rethugs will do everything they can to stop Obama.

I'm just wondering why the Bush Administration isn't rolling out the color coded terror alerts...(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeland_Security_Advisory_System).

I guess they realize that many Americans aren't gonna fall for that bullshit this time around.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cbc5g Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #2
22. If theres a "terror attack" and it's blamed on Iran
Edited on Sun Jun-22-08 06:34 PM by cbc5g
As a means of going to war....I might become a 9/11 truther. I don't trust anything this government under Bush says. Also interesting from the wiki page you cited.

"
# May 28, 2004, citing "credible evidence" of terrorist intent to affect upcoming elections.
# July 8, 2004, again citing "credible evidence" of terrorist intent to affect upcoming elections."

"Columbia University academic Brigitte L. Nacos has published a study identifying a correlation between increases in terrorism alert levels and Bush's popularity."

In other words, they were telling the American people - "Al Qaeda wants John Kerry to win and you don't like Al Qaeda..do you?"

I know they will try things to help McCain out and the media will probably fall in line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #2
30. Voters ate tired of Bush and his stupid wargames, he's taking their money
what about Pakistan which has nukes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. that is why we need to keep our eye on the prize
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveAmerica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 07:01 AM
Response to Original message
3. "Turn the Middle East into a Ball of Fire" - it's almost as though that's the plan...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. and Iran would welcome a few airstrikes to double their oil revenues
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 07:32 AM
Response to Original message
4. Given Obama's many pro-Israel statements, one must assume he supports an Israeli attack. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Beyond absurdity when he has already said that he supports direct talks
with Ahmadenijad and has taken a great deal of flak for it.


But if you feel that way then a McCain victory will be very comforting for you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #7
21. No, McCain victory will NOT be very comforting for me and an Israeli attack against Iran would be
a disaster.

Obama's Remarks at AIPAC Policy Conference can easily be interpreted as staunch support of an Israeli attack against Iran in the next few months.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/06/obamas_remarks_at_aipac_policy.html
as President I will never compromise when it comes to Israel's security. as President I will never compromise when it comes to Israel's security.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

I have been proud to be a part of a strong, bi-partisan consensus that has stood by Israel in the face of all threats. That is a commitment that both John McCain and I share, because support for Israel in this country goes beyond party. But part of our commitment must be speaking up when Israel's security is at risk, and I don't think any of us can be satisfied that America's recent foreign policy has made Israel more secure.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Those who threaten Israel threaten us. Israel has always faced these threats on the front lines. And I will bring to the White House an unshakeable commitment to Israel's security.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

I will ensure that Israel can defend itself from any threat - from Gaza to Tehran.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

There is no greater threat to Israel - or to the peace and stability of the region - than Iran. Now this audience is made up of both Republicans and Democrats, and the enemies of Israel should have no doubt that, regardless of party, Americans stand shoulder-to-shoulder in our commitment to Israel's security.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. That starts with aggressive, principled diplomacy without self-defeating preconditions, but with a clear-eyed understanding of our interests. We have no time to waste. We cannot unconditionally rule out an approach that could prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Finally, let there be no doubt: I will always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend our security and our ally Israel. Sometimes there are no alternatives to confrontation.


Spin anyway you wish but Obama has not stated he opposes an unprovoked, preemptive attack by Israel against Iran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #21
27. no spin is necessary he has already said that he is willing to have talks
with Ahmadinejad without preconditions - and he is the only one that is for it (except for Barr actually). The other Democrats used it against him and at an apporpriate time McCain is going to make a big deal out of it as well.

Does that mean that he still has to project strength and value the relationship of Israel in order to get elected?

Of course.

You can "interpret" Obama's remarks anyway that you want. The reality is that he has taken the most far reaching statement about personally engaging the Iranians. He has also articulated support for Israel and her right to existence.

If you think that he can do less and be elected President given the fact that Ahmadinejad has called for the elimination of Israel and is not cooperating with the IAEA then your grasp of the reality of American politics is tenuous at best.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. If Obama really wants to push diplomacy, he should say he opposes an Israeli attack on Iran and say
as president he will stop funding Israel's military forces if they attack Iran.

Absent that, he is condoning an Israeli attack on Iran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. He isn't going to and you should renounce your support of him
Obviously you live on a much higher moral plane and you should no longer sully yourself with Senator Obama who has to open himself to unending attacks from other Presidential candidates both Democrats and Republicans because he had the audacity to suggest what no other candidate was willing to do - meet with Ahmadinejad without precondition.

By doing so he has seriously undermined his chance for election but it isn't enough so he is never going to make you happy and you should take definitive steps to severe all support for him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-23-08 04:28 AM
Response to Reply #29
32. Sorry but I'm a Democrat and I vote for my party's candidate regardless of whether I agree 100% with
her or his position on every issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigdarryl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
5. Iran won't be no pushover if attacked. Isreal will have there hands full look what
happened when they went up against Hazzbolla they were for a minute getting there ass's kicked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Hezbollah Is A Terrorist Group That Was Dispersed Among The Populus
That's a lot different than two nations facing each other in a conventional battle...

Given the fact that Iran and Israel don't share common borders and are divided by a desert I don't see how they can fight one another...

I also question from a logistics standpoint how the Israeli's can take out the Iranian nuclear facilities if they are as disbursed as the evidence suggests...

As an aside the Iranians are no match for the Israeli Air Force but for that matter no nation is beside the U S or the U K and possibly France...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cbc5g Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #8
23. No kidding, their air force is pretty much OUR taxpayer airforce
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-23-08 05:54 AM
Response to Reply #23
33. You Could Say That About Egypt's Air Force And The Israeli's Would Blow Them Out Of The Sky
~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amandabeech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #5
26. What's this "they" business about Israel and Iran?
It will be a "we" business if not at the beginning then shortly thereafter.

Somebody better check to see if Rahm Emanuel is putting on his uniform again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newmajority Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
10. Why do the Israeli people tolerate a handful of delusional Likud shitheads ruining their country.
It's not like the Israeli Labor party were exactly pacifists, but the Likud are INSANE. And they don't even use DIEBOLD machines over there, so why can't Israel get rid of these freaks and put some normal people back in charge?

Unfortunately, it will probably get worse. NuttyYahoo will probably take over again, and that genocidal lunatic son of a bitch will start World War III for sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. well the irony is that the American people have tolerated 8 years of George Bush
and the Republican party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newmajority Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Sadly true
But at least we can partially blame it on widespread election fraud, through electronic and other means. And a totally Pravda-like media.

As far as I know, Israel has legitmate elections. I don't know much about their media, apart from Haaretz, which seems like a reasonable newspaper, and the Jerusalem Post, which definitely is not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Same Reason Bush and Cheney Are Still Free and Unindicted
Turning the Middle East into a ball of fire would put Big Oil out of business, and crimp the Saudi sheik style. The Israelis are welcome to try, I suppose. Bush sure wouldn't stop them.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #10
17. After Rabin's assassination there was a series of suicide bombings
Edited on Sun Jun-22-08 05:11 PM by Hippo_Tron
And Likud exploited that to the fullest to come to power and basically dismantle the Oslo Accords. Labor got power back for a brief time but once Sharon became Prime Minister it was all down hill from there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tutonic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 04:51 PM
Response to Original message
14. Please, Stop believing every five second sound bite released
by the Bush administration. Now today we have John Bolton making predictions regarding the bombing of Iran. These people continue to exist for one reason only--to scare the crap out of the American public while major corporations profit from our fears. My advice is to "Look the other way." FDR had it correct--we have nothing to fear but fear itself. Don't fall for this nonsense that they've been repeating since last July. Remember there was gong to be an attack last August, then in September, then in January, and March and May and June, and now what--November. If you read the Israeli newspapers you'd understand that many conservative Israeli citizens are upset because their Government is preparing to negotiate with Iran. And the London and French newspapers are reporting that European sanctions are about to be lifted against Iran. Did you hear Dana Perino say this? Bet you didn't see that in the WAPO or NYT either. And if you watched the BBC you'd know that China and Russia have made serious overtures at Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia. Bet John Bolton forgot to tell you that. Lets keep our eye on the prize and stop succumbing to every right-wing fabrication that the compromised media spreads.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. This is a little bit different having gone so far as staging simulating attacks by
Edited on Sun Jun-22-08 05:47 PM by grantcart
100 Israeli jets.

We also have not seen this kind of response by the IAEA before also.

BTW I used mostly foreign sources including the Jerusalem times for the information although the leaks from the Pentagon were through the NYT.

And the point of the of the OP is that while there is in fighting amongst the Democrats we take our eyes off of what is really at stake in November.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #19
24. After hearing McClellan testify about how Bush does things from a gut level,
Edited on Sun Jun-22-08 08:15 PM by truedelphi
I imagine it's likely this is for real.

So what if it makes everything worse. Or that we ahve no contingencies to deal with the fact taht our Army has been worn into the ground in Iraq.

If Jesus has been talking to him lately and is giving W the nod for more war, W is gonna comply.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. at this point its still sabre rattling but the wild card are the Iranians
they would love to have a couple of airstrikes to stir things up and double the cost of oil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 04:57 PM
Response to Original message
15. Ooh, is it time for our monthly "war with Iran?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #15
20. Yup but this time they actually got 100 Isreali jets to simulate an attacke

Sabre rattling on steroids.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 05:07 PM
Response to Original message
16. Business as usual sabre rattling, there will be no invasion of Iran...
Unless McCain is elected. Mark my words
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. You are right that it is sabre rattling and Israel usually attacks without
notice rather than giving an indication.



It does help drive up the cost of oil and most importantly is your last observation - if McCain is elected his lack of patience will eventually result in an airstrike by somebody.


The one thing that could trigger an attack? Some outrageous Iranian provocation that results in American deaths in Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 09:46 PM
Response to Original message
31. We won't invade or bomb
We have somewhere around 160,000 to 200,000 troops and Mercenaries occupying Iraq. We are occupying areas that are unfriendly and the only allies we would have internally are Sunnis. Iran's Army has at least 1,000,000 soldiers plus the addition of Shiite forces internally who would turn on our troops. The Kurds would most likely take defensive positions to secure their territory and would not aide us. Any crossing of the border or bombing would result in a disaster the likes of which the world has never seen.

Our weapons are better however Iran is a modern army equipped by Russia and China.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 12:13 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC