1/01/2006

Coming To A (War) Theater Near You! Iran

Heard about the Bush administration's upcoming strike against Iran? You can read about it here or you can read about it here, the only place you can't read about it is in the US media, as the propaganda campaign has not yet begun (if there is to be one), the same ol' crap about ties to alQa'da, or the weapons of mass destruction (actually, Germany says that Iran is being compliant with the NPT) designed to scare the Faux News watching beer swilling mouth breathing brainwashed chemically imbalanced flag waving Americans who still think that Saddam had something to do with 9/11.
Yes, last week, Porter Goss was in Turkey, telling the government there that if they gave the US support in the upcoming strike, the US would let them attack the Kurds in Iran. How very nice.Yes, the Israeli masters have decideed to call of their attack on Tehran because the American lackeys in DC are more than happy to do it. Like Bush says, he's a war president, and everything he does, he does with war on the mind. Makes me wonder how he takes a crap. And now that Corporate America is clearing out thousands of middle income jobs, there needs to be some room made at the bottom, why not send more troops to their death. One can only imagine the amount of drool coagulating in the corner of Dick Cheney's mouth at the thought of even more obscene profits made by Halliburton from all the no-bid contracts and overcharges they'll get from the government after we blow the tar out of Tehran and it needs to be put together again.
Yeah, Ol' Dick has been foaming at the mouth to strike Iran ever since last July, when he ordered the Pentagon to draw up a contingency plan to nuke Iran iin the event of a terrorist strike on US soil, even if Iran wasn't involved! And Bush himself is off to set some kind of record, most quagmires in a presidency, so there you go.
All this will happen before March of this new year, when Iran will start trading it's oil in euros, as opposed to dollars (which was the same thing Saddam did to earn the rath of the oilmen in DC), which begs the question: Will Bush use his State Of The Union address to make his case against Iran, or will he use it to announce to the American people (and likely most of Congress as well) that he has already started operations in Iran?

16 comments:

PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH said...

No where else except for FOX, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, and PBS. You really broke this story. Twenty years down the road while your sitting in a big hippie pot cirlce around a fire you can tell everyone about the day you broke the "big" story, but were never given credit for it. After the story, you can look up at the sky, see the stars, and realize just how small and un-important you and the smelly stoned liberals who surround you are.

Lily said...

Smelly stoned liberals? I see our guest is accustomed to sloppy generalizations. No doubt he thinks we are wearing tie dyed t shirts listening to Arlo Guthrie too. How cliche.
If only people would rely on the merits of their facts, instead of schoolyard name calling, the blogosphere might be a better place. Or at least we might consider you a productive participant.
On blogs, hits=money. Keep making your rounds, supporting the cause!!!
Hey, you can spell. You're one up on the last toadie we threw back into the swamp.

Kvatch said...

We better hope that such a strike relies solely on air power. Hate to think about the well-armed insurgency and well-armed Kurds in the rear.

lily said...

Terrible to consider, kvatch. Indeed.

Lew Scannon said...

Well, Mr. President, I hope that when FOX CNN, etc. reported it in their effort to be fair and balanced they did report how iran is in compliance with the NPT, and is only seeking to gain nuclear power (I don't know if they did because I don't watch TV).I also hope Mr. President that if they did report this that they also stated the reason we're attacking Iran, with no connections to 9/11 or links to alQa'da, that it's because the Israeli government wishes and America has everything to lose and nothing to gain by this attack. For Russia has vowed to stand behind Iran should it be attacked. I hope that they didn't start spewing the propaganda that you wish them to and actually investigated these claims, unlike the claims you made against Iraq which turned out to be bogus. After all Mr. Bush, there's a saying down in Texas, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me because I can't get fooled again."

Lew Scannon said...

And by the way, Mr. President, I did post a story about this a week ago at http://www.unbrainwashed.blogspot.com (Iran, Iran So Far Away), and at least two more times in the archives. Why did it take a week for the corporate media to report it?

lily said...

No wonder the President is so clueless, he's reading blogs! (a joke)

Anonymous said...

Supplement:
Iran threatens 'crushing' response to U.S. or Israeli attack
17:09:35 EST Jan 1, 2006
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran warned Sunday of a "crushing" response if
its nuclear and military facilities are attacked by the United States
or Israel.

Top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani said, however, talk of such an
attack most likely is "psychological warfare."

"Iran has prepared itself...they will get a crushing response if they
make such a mistake," Larijani said on Iranian television late
Sunday.

Larijani said Israel would "suffer greatly" if it launched an attack.

"If there is any truth in such talks, Israel will suffer greatly.
It's a very small country within our range."

"Our (defence) preparedness is a deterrence," he said.

He also said a Russian proposal the two countries enrich uranium on
Russian territory could not ignore Iran's right to carry out
enrichment at home.

"It's not logical for a country to put the fate of its nation at the
disposal of another country, even if it's a friend. You can meet part
of your fuel needs from abroad."

"But is there a guarantee that nuclear fuel producers won't play with
you over price or other things? History and experience show that if
you don't have technology, you will damage your independence," he
said.

Larijani's remarks coincided with Tehran's announcement it had
produced equipment for separating uranium from its ore, a fresh
development in Tehran's drive to control the whole nuclear fuel
cycle - from mining uranium to enriching it for use in atomic
reactors.

European news media have indicated in recent days the United States
is preparing its allies for a strike against Iran's nuclear and
military facilities with the aim of curtailing Iran's nuclear
program.

Reports of a strike escalated after comments by Iran's President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who called Israel a "disgraceful blot" that
should be "wiped off the map" and his call to relocate Israel to
Europe or North America.

Recent visits to Turkey by CIA Director Porter Goss, head of the FBI,
NATO General Secretary Jaap De Hoop Scheffer and U.S. Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice have increased speculation about a possible
military strike against Iran. NATO member Turkey is Iran's
northwestern neighbour.

President George W. Bush has said his administration would not
exclude the possibility of using military force against Iran over its
nuclear program, which the United States believes is aimed at
producing weapons.

Pulitzer Prize-winning writer Seymour Hersh reported in the New
Yorker magazine in Janurary last year the Bush administration had
been "conducting secret reconnaissance missions inside Iran" to
gather intelligence and targeting information. U.S. Defence
Department officials said the article was filled with mistakes but
did not deny its basic point.

Israel fears Iran is reaching a point of no return in nuclear
technology. Iran has openly said it has already achieved proficiency
in cycle of nuclear fuel, a technology that can be used to produce
fuel for reactors to generate electricity or materials for a bomb.

The United States and European Union have backed a Russian proposal
to move Iran's uranium-enrichment program to Russian territory. The
proposal aims to ensure Iran cannot use uranium enrichment to build
nuclear weapons. Enrichment is a key process that can produce either
fuel for a nuclear reactor or the material for a warhead.

Larijani said Iran needs talks with Moscow to clarify what he
described as "ambiguities" but said the proposal can't deny Iran
uranium enrichment at home.

"The proposal is too general. If it talks about denying Iran of its
rights, no. We have no right to do it," he said.

"But we have to study it and see if Iran's interests can be met. It
can be a complimentary."

"There is no reason to reject it before discussions and accurate
study," he said.

Larijani is secretary of the Supreme National Security Council,
Iran's top security decision-making body that handles Iran's nuclear
talks.

He said the Russian proposal will have nothing to do with nuclear
talks among Iran and Britain, France and Germany. The talks last
month made little progress and are to continue later this month.



© The Canadian Press, 2006

WAR HEALS ALL WOUNDS said...

I remember when Saddam was talking mad shit about how he would defeat our forces, and even then liberals tried to reinforce the fear, and here they go again.
I hope we do go to war with Iran, many will die, but thier deaths will not be in vain. In such a conflict we will be able to publicly defeat both the Islamo-facists, and the former Soviet Republic.
I am sure in time even the liberal elite will find good in this "Project Bush".

Lily said...

"Many will enter, few will win. See participating dealers for details".
How easily people decide what 'causes' are worth death. Do you intend to go? Will you give your son or daighter to this effort?
By your rationale, why not go to war with everyone, then we can have all the oil and hubris we can handle. Nobody can challenge us if nobody's around.
Better yet, why not just nuke everyone by your logic, little babies, etc. and wipe out all threats to our way of life? What level of killing would satisfy you? A million? Ten million?
Its always interesting when people mention the 'liberal elite'. Elite refers to a small select group, class, or establishment that not only has the power to exact privilege but also to exclude.
I think the "Barons for Bush' club qualifies far more than some sloppy demographic sub category you've conjured.. When will people on the right realize that the whole 'liberal elite" 'patrician ivy league brat" characterization is not only inaccurate, but dated in its references?
Do you resent our literacy or something?
At least our liberal elite didn't sell out for a shitty tax rebate- talk about the voter whore.

Bill Bill said...

The dominos did not fall like the administration thought. Looks like the first one missed the rest. They will try to knock the next one over... (while the first one still stands)

lily said...

Its hard to tell which you mean by 'first one'. Assuming you mean Afghanistan? Are you saying that we did not wrap up our war mongering there before proceeding to Iraq, or that we have not wrapped up our war mongering in Iraq and yet we have designs on our next contestant for Bomberama????
Look, we have our bases to protect the pipelines now In Afgahanistan... we will have what we wanted from the Iraqi people too.
Did you think we were really there for liberation???

Eli Blake said...

Some observations on Iran:

1. They have achieved all of the objectives they ever had in Iraq, and without firing a shot. We did it for them.

2. With our army stretched to the bone in Iraq and elsewhere, we can't mount a credible invasion threat and the Iranians know it. About all we can do is bomb the crap out of them, but they probably are figuring that they can survive that. I blogged on this on August 20.

3. In dealing with America, they have observed that Saddam tried to appease Bush and let the inspectors back in and made other conciliatory moves. Dictator Kim, in contrast, has gotten more and more belligerent, and we've backed down. So the Iranians have to have figured out that bellicosity works (maybe it's a language that neo-cons understand) so they have quit playing shell games so much with their nuclear stuff or saying things diplomatically, and instead come right out and said what they are thinking in the open.

tp said...

GREAT point!!! Our lust for Saddam seemed to be enhanced by his sudden pussyturn.

Lew Scannon said...

What all these chicken hawks don't realize is that a pre-emptive strike, such as the one against Iraq, or the planned one against Iran, is a violation of international law. And the Republicans, with and with out the current administration have shown they have no regard for any laws they have to follow. Scooter Libby, Bob Ney, Duke Cunningham, Tom Delay, Bill Frist, all broke the law and rather take personla responsibility, have shown that they clearly feel accountability is for the other guy.
Second, our plan against Iran is about as half-assed as our plan against Iraq, no contingency, no plan for dealing with the aftermath, just drop some bombs and hey, problem solved. This proves the insanity of the Bush administration, they keep making the same mistakes again and again and expect different results.

lily said...

WHOA. Hold on. You think they are making mistakes? I think things have been going according to plan. When we read the strategy now often called the "Wolfowitz Doctrine" we can see that these are not 'mistakes'. Mistakes are not PREPLANNED!

Graphics by Lily.Template Designed by Douglas Bowman - Updated to New Blogger by: Blogger Team
Modified for 3-Column Layout by Hoctro