Larisa Alexandrovna:IT'S CLEAR CHENEY&NEOCONS DESPERATE FOR WAR WITH IRAN

Is Lebanon the Trigger for U.S. War With Iran?

By Larisa Alexandrovna, AlterNet. Posted August 10, 2006.

Connect the dots, and it's clear that Cheney and the neocons are desperate to start a war with Iran. Tools

For over a year now I have been reporting on activities that appear to be leading the United States into direct confrontation with Iran. Aside from Sy Hersh and a few others, the majority of the U.S. media largely has ignored this march toward war, mainly because it helped disseminate the pre-war propaganda prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq. But failing to connect the dots on Iran is just as bad, if not worse, because Iran is by no means Iraq. A war with Persia will be a catastrophe of unimaginable consequences and the trigger for that action may have already begun.

Several months back, I reported that concern was rapidly rising that the United States was setting the table for its Iran engagement:

Speculation has been growing on a possible air strike against Iran. But with the failure of the Bush administration to present a convincing case to the U.N. Security Council and to secure political backing domestically, some experts say the march toward war with Iran is on pause barring an "immediate need."

An immediate need is also sometimes called "the trigger."

MUCH more at:
http://www.alternet.org/story/40042/

A :kick: and :thumbsup: for this one.

:kick:

It was an article just published in the Asia Times:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x228043

It's interesting the language that's being used by Israeli spokespeople/analysts and the Bushetals...they're identical. It's seems there is a fast-track effort about it; much faster than we had from the 'we'll find them and a hunt them down' to the 'mushroom cloud'.

Both have pretty much stopped using the word "terrorists" and substituted "extremists" (though they still use terrorism and terrorist acts); Both are dropping a verbal al Queda bomb when backed into a corner; both are actively connecting Iran and Syria at every opportunity.

A couple of days ago, I watched the Isaeli (Mark ?something?) spokesperson being interviewed about the attack on the Palestinian refugee camp in southern Lebanon. Surprisingly, the 'anchor' was asking somewhat probing questions. Unsurprisingly, the spokesperson went the AQ reminder route for the US audience by saying (paraphrased), "We've had problems with this camp before where it's known al Qaeda to be." Also, there's the "news" that Iranian fighters were found among Hezbollah that the IDF had killed.

Israel's gone beyond the "right to defend itself" and used justifications that are remarkably similar to the Bush Pre-emptive Doctrine in their public statements. It would not suprise me to be watching prime-time TV and have breaking news about a US-Israel airstrike on Iran's nuclear facilities...bunker buster bombs dropped, over a million dead.

Another standup job, Larissa! Great work!

In plain sight.

They just needed 9/11 to give them the ability to carry it out...

I am afraid the genie will never get put BACK IN THE BOTTLE!

the article. Lol, kpete. Thanks for posting this article!

Absolutely this aggression by Israel was supposed to act like bait to draw out Syria and Iran so there would be an excuse to attack and bomb them, too.

However, as BushInc has learned in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Israel and the USA are learning in Lebanon... things don't always go as planned when a people really really really don't want to be attacked or occupied and know how to use guerilla warfare effectively.

I'm sure the neocons are still having those ME-in-flames wet dreams at night, but seeing the way reality is during the day, they're probably getting very nervous and disappointed...

I guess the destruction of Iraq and Lebanon, and the regression in Afghanistan, just wasn't enough.......

Sue

the BushCo-Likudite Iran Show.

Just call it a hunch.

I'd like LaLa to further develop her thesis, though. Always read her.:thumbsup:

wittingly and not?

There's a lot at stake in the effort to try to convince Iran to pull back from its nuclear program. I don't think such efforts, even where they involve some deception, are necessarily ill-intended.

This mess is yet again, all to convenient.

how much support the trigger-happy Bush admin. would have provided British authorities in solving the latest terrorist plot?

they outed a British source that might have blocked terror attacks like the one in London. So the mighty, concentrated with a vengeance, Pakistan dealing Bush administration not did nothing to help Britain but ruined some of their sources in order to brag about doing something pathetic to limit Pakistan's spread of nuclear technology. That may have even encouraged terrorists to take a shot and luckily the British seemed to have improved from the Cold War fiasco days.

Those are things you will never hear regardless of what happens one way or the other. Similarly, if we ARE hit because of deliberate Bush inattention to homeland security, all the people who have been complaining about that for years will not be heard in the din of "Props-to-the-Chief". Despite the complaints and questions from democrats the issue has never been enjoined, Bush has never been pinned down for blame, the consequences of Bush and GOP policy never discussed. This guarantees the exploitation angle remains intact just as our defense is a piece of rotting Swiss cheese.

The British police work and attitude is diametrically different from our defenseless posture. That is not going to be given fair media play no matter how glaring it is. So Bush and Rove will use their evident failing as a political plus, because they can, absent any sane public information system and forum and government.

Remember The Maine?

Gulf of Tonkin?

Yes, we do.

more so than at any time during my life. I have no faith that our leaders and even Iran's leaders are trying to avoid war and I fear that it may be too late to stop them.

Where is congress in all of this? Why aren't they standing up and demanding hearings, control of war declarations, NIE's, a seat at the table? This thing is way out of control. There are virtually no mechanisms in place now to stop our administration from expanding ME conflagration. The article says that all they need is some finding of "immediate need?" How hard is that to get? And in any case, why does the WH need "political backing domestically" or a "convincing case?"

Is Israel steering our foreign policy?

We've been saying it here for several years, the neo cons have not even tried to hide the fact that Iran and the whole damned oily middle east is their's to take.

Next will be a war on social programs and the safety net will be gone when the economy collapses.

They're making the US MORE vulnerable each and every day.