Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Former CIA Officer: US to Attack Iran Within 6 Months

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 04:57 PM
Original message
Former CIA Officer: US to Attack Iran Within 6 Months
Former CIA Officer: US to Attack Iran Within 6 Months

Posted by Muriel Kane and David Edwards at 2:00 PM on August 21, 2007.

David Edwards and Muriel Kane: Former CIA field officer Bob Baer says, "If this is going to happen, it's going to happen very quickly and it's going to surprise a lot of people."


Fox News asked former CIA field officer Bob Baer on Tuesday whether the US is "gearing up for a military strike on Iran." Baer has written a column for Time indicating that Washington officials expect an attack within the next six months.

"I've taken an informal poll inside the government," Baer told Fox. "The feeling is we will hit the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps." His Time column also suggested that "as long as we have bombers and missiles in the air, we will hit Iran's nuclear facilities."

Baer explained that what his sources anticipate is "not exactly a war." He said the administration is convinced "that the Iranians are interfering in Iraq and the rest of the Gulf" but that "if there is an attack on Iran it would be very quick, it would be a warning."


"We won't see American troops cross the border. ... If this is going to happen, it's going to happen very quickly and it's going to surprise a lot of people," said Baer. "I hope I'm wrong frankly, but we're going to see."

The video at link is from Fox's America's Newsroom, broadcast on August 21.

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/60371/#more
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 04:58 PM
Response to Original message
1. GOD DAMNIT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
16. That was/is my very first reaction, too.
:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
That Is Quite Enough Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
2. This is just what we need...
I can see it now in the MSM: "US attacks Iran, but it's okay cause it's not really a war!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
3. Impeach Bush and Cheney before that happens
Please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walldude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Can't.. too busy screwing up everything else..
And while nobody wants Impeachment more than me this congress can't even stand up to the president when he is taking health care away from children(cause as you know most Americans are against health care for children :eyes: ), how the hell can we expect them to impeach.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PDJane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
4. The whole business with Iran is a charade.
Iran will stop being an enemy when the US stops telling themselves that Iran is an enemy.

This is just beyond stupid; this bunch should be quarantined.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walldude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
5. So now we will air strike a country
because they might be planning to do something against us in the future. Excuse me for asking but didn't we already fuck that up in Iraq? And another thing, wouldn't that reasoning give the Iranians the same excuse for a legitimate attack on the U.S.? This is madness..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
7. Baer is
an intelligent man.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. I know; that's why it's scary. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. Prelude to an Attack on Iran "There will be an attack on Iran." ROBERT BAER
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 05:16 PM
Response to Original message
9. Bush will probably attack because there is so little opposition...
By "opposition" I mean a large segment of the population which is motivated to resist such a move and is perceived by the far right as such. The far right does not see this and neither do I. Bush et al does see a weak and leaderless "Democrat" Party (no surprise there) and streets filled with automobiles, not people. There is no cohesive organization to carry out any action; in fact, there is no agreement or even perception as to what an action would entail.

Ask yourself: "what would a major movement against the far right policies look like?" I would see big strikes, sit-ins, civil disobedience, marches, etc. But I'm a fifty-nine so my vision is in Technicolor and Vista Vision, all brought to you by Spike Tail Productions. What of the younger crowd? What of ANY crowd who plays castanets on a keyboard, flame baits and cock struts across the pixels? Do they -- do we -- really think that creates community from which we derive legitimacy and power?

Like it or not, when I was young we had the Big 3 networks and the Top 40. For all their faults, they recognized and gave credibility to the political organizations who could raise a unified ruckus (or sell the most records). 'Taint that way anymore. We have created a sublimely individuated means of communication, forming electronic cells in which we willingly imprison ourselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turner Ashby Donating Member (140 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. We must have a guarantee
that Iran won't retaliate in any way against our 160,000 soldiers in Iraq. Like we had a guarantee that we would be greeted as Liberators in Iraq. We see how well this govt has thought out war issues before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #11
27. That could seem...
Edited on Tue Aug-21-07 10:01 PM by tiptoe
a perspective for such an attack: to provoke Iran...into Iraq...to attack a stretched-thin, stressed-out volunteer American force. (An attack by Iran -- or even an increased contingency of such brought on by any American pre-emptive move, however "limited" -- could become basis for invoking a military draft, one that Democrats would become "stuck with" come 2008 elections.)

Such, too, would be keeping with a Neocon agenda -- never revealed during election campaigns to the American people, including "traditional" fiscally-conservative Republicans -- to "reality-create" "perpetual war"...i.e. not "against terrorism"...not "against WMDs"...not "for democracy"...but rather for sustained weakening of the US economy: "Wars" synthesized on lies in conjunction with annual tax cuts to wealthy, an historically-unprecedented combination of policies that conspires to "starve the beast" of revenues for domestic-spending on government programs (ultimately targeted for supplantation-by-privatization by this radically-conservative, fraudulently-elected mal-cabal). Example: Calls for privatization will come as Mafia-like "arguments you can't refuse" when disasters-"in-the-creating" come to LIHOP-reality-fruition through closures of FDA facilities in a context of increasing questionable/health-problematic imports (today, it's clothing from China) and less government resources to regulate and enforce.

"Politics" through killing and sabotage: apparently how the Military-Industrial-Complex "does it" and what Eisenhower warned against.

Re-open 9/11 investigation...at the right time (...and/or "threaten" to do so).

Chinese Imports Highlight Woeful State of Consumer Safety
...
Although country-of-origin legislation passed Congress in 2002, Mr. Bush [and Grover Norquist?]- obsessed by the costly Iraq war and indentured to large corporate importers-did not push his Republicans in Congress to provide funds for enforcement. Instead, the president has signed into law delays in the labeling rule. Therefore, except for the required labeling of seafood from foreign countries (consumers take note), all other food in your supermarket is not required to have a label of the country that exported it. It is the majority Democrats’ job now to compel mandatory labeling of all imported foods.
...
It gets worse. The U.S. is on the verge of becoming a net food importer!

China has allies in the U.S.-the giant food processors that love to rely on profit-maximizing Chinese foodstuffs, additives and other ingredients. The large wholesalers and retail chains, like Wal-Mart, buffer the Chinese export machine from long overdue inspections and enforcement actions.

The inadequate budget of the FDA, and its fractured role with other federal agencies such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture, contributes to the failure of consumer protection. The FDA 2007 budget is only $1.5 billion, or one third of the price of just one aircraft carrier. That is not enough to defend the health and safety of the three hundred million Americans from hazardous drugs and foodstuffs.

Especially since the FDA has weak or non-existent enforcement powers to obtain information, keep records, demand recalls or impose effective fines.

Presently, the FDA is able to inspect about one percent of food shipments into the U.S. What can consumers do? Start yelling at your Senators and Representatives. This is one issue they are afraid to duck if the heat is on them. Second, buy from farmers and other producers near you, so you can skip the long chain of middlemen from China to your area who could have caught the problem but just pass the buck, so to speak. ...

NZ probes contamination in Chinese clothing imports
The China factory behind Mattel toy scare
Stay informed about defective products
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JTFrog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. The opposition
is going to come from China and Russia. This isn't going to be pretty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
USA_1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #9
29. Precisely ...
... the Democratic Party today is the party of appeasement. It does nothing to curb Bush's plans of world conquest and this serves to encourage the traitor to do his dirty work.

It's also a good bet that Bush wants to wait until after the election so that it will not hurt his party's chances and so that he can contrive some way of blaming Democrats for all the trouble that will follow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MichiganVote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
10. I don't believe his words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hydra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 05:25 PM
Response to Original message
13. Bang them drums!
How can it be a surprise if we see something about it from Propaganda Inc. every day?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jimshoes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
15. How is it that anyone believes anything this
lying, self serving, gang of criminals in the White House says any more. They have lied about everything from day one. They continue to lie. And right now they are thinking about the lies they are going to tell tomorrow. This is not the America I wish to live in or the type of people I want to have the power of the government over me. There is something very wrong with this government, to borrow a line from a recent movie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #15
22. this government has a death wish, and a sick SOB in abuse of
power, and it will take everything we got in ourselves to stop them, oh, here I go again, wishful thinking....sigh, the rest of world will not stand by and not do anything either. We have our own homegrown terrorists in DC right now, we are destroying ourselves from within.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cui bono Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
17. And 97 senators already gave him the OK to do so.
Or did that bill pass yet? I know they approved the LIEberman amendment giving * the OK to attack Iran.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. "not exactly a war."
The Iranians will complain loudly & do nothing.

Russia & China will also complain loudly & do nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #17
33. It did not say it was ok to attack Iraq
It was more similar to the Clinton era resolution that said, in essence, that Iraq would be better off without Saddam, because he was a despicable despot. (in different words - of course)

You may have noticed that while Bush claimed he could attack because of the Fighting Terrorism resolution and (in his signing statement to the IWR) because he was President - he did NOT mention that amendment - even though he could have said that it was approved for Clinton. That has to mean something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 08:52 PM
Response to Original message
19. Don't worry, the senate will send Bush a letter saying they don't approve,
unless, of course, someone asks them not to. On second thought, a letter might "divide the country".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cui bono Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Well 97 senators already voted for an amendment that DOES approve. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Congress has no say about this.
An attack on Iran can occur at any time. After 90 days Congress gets to weigh in. That would be a little late, don't ya think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. I was being sarcastic anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cui bono Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. Understood. I wish I had been. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #24
28. me too...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
25. I don't find his remarks at all surprising
In fact, I wouldn't find an attack within the next six weeks surprising. The cabal is probably using this August recess to put the finishing touches on their plans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
26. Ya know, I figured that george would get us into at least one war during his regime. I never
thought he would start WWIII. :wtf: Is anyone going to stop this madness?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
global1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
30. Don't Worry - Hillary Will Prepare Us To Fight The New War......nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JFN1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 09:37 PM
Response to Original message
31. WW III
will be official if we attack Iran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IDemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 09:39 PM
Response to Original message
32. "not exactly a war." Huh?
"Bombers and missiles in the air", making strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities and armed forces, would be considered an act of war by most rational persons.

Oh, wait a minute....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SnowGoose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 10:25 PM
Response to Original message
34. And the Iranians are supposed to be surprised?
They aren't stupid. They have already gamed these scenarios and have determined their best move should such an attack occur. There will be response, but as an American president might say "at a time an place of our choosing".

Feel safer yet? Yea, me neither.
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 Tue Apr 30th 2024, 08:56 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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