US Strike on IRAN 'Imminent'
Wayen Madsen | 22.10.2004 18:45
According to White House and Washington Beltway insiders, the Bush administration, worried that it could lose the presidential election to Senator John F. Kerry, has initiated plans to launch a military strike on Iran's top Islamic leadership, its nuclear reactor at Bushehr on the Persian Gulf, and key nuclear targets throughout the country, including the main underground research site at Natanz in central Iran and another in Isfahan. Targets of the planned U.S. attack reportedly include mosques in Tehran, Qom, and Isfahan known by the U.S. to headquarter Iran's top mullahs.
The Iran attack plan was reportedly drawn up after internal polling indicated that if the Bush administration launched a so-called anti-terrorist attack on Iran some two weeks before the election, Bush would be assured of a landslide win against Kerry. Reports of a pre-emptive strike on Iran come amid concerns by a number of political observers that the Bush administration would concoct an "October Surprise" to influence the outcome of the presidential election.
According to White House sources, the USS John F. Kennedy was deployed to the Arabian Sea to coordinate the attack on Iran. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld discussed the Kennedy's role in the planned attack on Iran when he visited the ship in the Arabian Sea on October 9. Rumsfeld and defense ministers of U.S. coalition partners, including those of Albania, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Iraq, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Mongolia, Poland, Qatar, Romania, and Ukraine briefly discussed a very "top level" view of potential dual-track military operations in Iran and Iraq in a special "war room" set up on board the aircraft carrier. America's primary ally in Iraq, the United Kingdom, did not attend the planning session because it reportedly disagrees with a military strike on Iran. London also suspects the U.S. wants to move British troops from Basra in southern Iraq to the Baghdad area to help put down an expected surge in Sh'ia violence in Sadr City and other Sh'ia areas in central Iraq when the U.S. attacks Iran as well as clear the way for a U.S. military strike across the Iraqi-Iranian border aimed at securing the huge Iranian oil installations in Abadan. U.S. allies South Korea, Australia, Kuwait, Jordan, Italy, Netherlands, and Japan were also left out of the USS John F. Kennedy planning discussions because of their reported opposition to any strike on Iran.
In addition, Israel has been supplied by the United States with 500 "bunker buster" bombs. According to White House sources, the Israeli Air Force will attack Iran's nuclear facility at Bushehr with the U.S. bunker busters.The joint U.S.-Israeli pre-emptive military move against Iran reportedly was crafted by the same neo-conservative grouping in the Pentagon and Vice President Dick Cheney's office that engineered the invasion of Iraq.
Morale aboard the USS John F. Kennedy is at an all-time low, something that must be attributable to the knowledge that the ship will be involved in an extension of U.S. military actions in the Persian Gulf region. The Commanding Officer of an F-14 Tomcat squadron was relieved of command for a reported shore leave "indiscretion" in Dubai and two months ago the Kennedy's commanding officer was relieved for cause.
The White House leak about the planned attack on Iran was hastened by concerns that Russian technicians present at Bushehr could be killed in an attack, thus resulting in a wider nuclear confrontation between Washington and Moscow. International Atomic Energy Agency representatives are also present at the Bushehr facility. In addition, an immediate Iranian Shahab ballistic missile attack against Israel would also further destabilize the Middle East. The White House leaks about the pre-emptive strike may have been prompted by warnings from the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency that an attack on Iran will escalate out of control. Intelligence circles report that both intelligence agencies are in open revolt against the Bush White House.
White House sources also claimed they are "terrified" that Bush wants to start a dangerous war with Iran prior to the election and fear that such a move will trigger dire consequences for the entire world.
Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist and columnist. He served in the National Security Council (NSA) during the Reagan Administration and wrote the introduction to Forbidden Truth. He is the co-author, with john Stanton of "America's Nightmare: The Presidency of George Bush II." His forthcoming book is titled: "jaded Tasks: Big Oil, Black Ops, and Brass Plates." Madsen can be reached at
Wmadsen777@aol.com
The Iran attack plan was reportedly drawn up after internal polling indicated that if the Bush administration launched a so-called anti-terrorist attack on Iran some two weeks before the election, Bush would be assured of a landslide win against Kerry. Reports of a pre-emptive strike on Iran come amid concerns by a number of political observers that the Bush administration would concoct an "October Surprise" to influence the outcome of the presidential election.
According to White House sources, the USS John F. Kennedy was deployed to the Arabian Sea to coordinate the attack on Iran. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld discussed the Kennedy's role in the planned attack on Iran when he visited the ship in the Arabian Sea on October 9. Rumsfeld and defense ministers of U.S. coalition partners, including those of Albania, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Iraq, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Mongolia, Poland, Qatar, Romania, and Ukraine briefly discussed a very "top level" view of potential dual-track military operations in Iran and Iraq in a special "war room" set up on board the aircraft carrier. America's primary ally in Iraq, the United Kingdom, did not attend the planning session because it reportedly disagrees with a military strike on Iran. London also suspects the U.S. wants to move British troops from Basra in southern Iraq to the Baghdad area to help put down an expected surge in Sh'ia violence in Sadr City and other Sh'ia areas in central Iraq when the U.S. attacks Iran as well as clear the way for a U.S. military strike across the Iraqi-Iranian border aimed at securing the huge Iranian oil installations in Abadan. U.S. allies South Korea, Australia, Kuwait, Jordan, Italy, Netherlands, and Japan were also left out of the USS John F. Kennedy planning discussions because of their reported opposition to any strike on Iran.
In addition, Israel has been supplied by the United States with 500 "bunker buster" bombs. According to White House sources, the Israeli Air Force will attack Iran's nuclear facility at Bushehr with the U.S. bunker busters.The joint U.S.-Israeli pre-emptive military move against Iran reportedly was crafted by the same neo-conservative grouping in the Pentagon and Vice President Dick Cheney's office that engineered the invasion of Iraq.
Morale aboard the USS John F. Kennedy is at an all-time low, something that must be attributable to the knowledge that the ship will be involved in an extension of U.S. military actions in the Persian Gulf region. The Commanding Officer of an F-14 Tomcat squadron was relieved of command for a reported shore leave "indiscretion" in Dubai and two months ago the Kennedy's commanding officer was relieved for cause.
The White House leak about the planned attack on Iran was hastened by concerns that Russian technicians present at Bushehr could be killed in an attack, thus resulting in a wider nuclear confrontation between Washington and Moscow. International Atomic Energy Agency representatives are also present at the Bushehr facility. In addition, an immediate Iranian Shahab ballistic missile attack against Israel would also further destabilize the Middle East. The White House leaks about the pre-emptive strike may have been prompted by warnings from the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency that an attack on Iran will escalate out of control. Intelligence circles report that both intelligence agencies are in open revolt against the Bush White House.
White House sources also claimed they are "terrified" that Bush wants to start a dangerous war with Iran prior to the election and fear that such a move will trigger dire consequences for the entire world.
Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist and columnist. He served in the National Security Council (NSA) during the Reagan Administration and wrote the introduction to Forbidden Truth. He is the co-author, with john Stanton of "America's Nightmare: The Presidency of George Bush II." His forthcoming book is titled: "jaded Tasks: Big Oil, Black Ops, and Brass Plates." Madsen can be reached at
Wmadsen777@aol.com
Wayen Madsen
Comments
Hide the following 3 comments
no no no no no no
23.10.2004 10:48
dave
cynical and short-sighted - typical presidential behaviour
23.10.2004 15:26
It seems awfully arrogant, they believe they can go bomb whoever they want and people will just cower under their tables indefinitely. They should learn some lessons from history. They couldn't stay in iraq if other nations in the region turned against them, they appear to be incapable of conducting a successful land war, seeing how they need british help in iraq, and this is just one country their taking on. What happens when they try taking on 2, or 3?
but of course, bush'll have his extended presidency by then, and he'd never stand a chance of winning a 3rd term anyway, cause the coffins will just keep piling up faster and faster as the war on terror continues and escalates.
in short: very, very, very stupid idea. don't do it bushy, the american people aren't as stupid as you like to think. the voters might be, but that's voters for you.
-
Will Israel vs. Iran be the Next Act?
24.10.2004 15:07
Will Israel vs. Iran be the Next Act?
The article first appeared in the East Texas Review Oct. 21, 2004.
The United States’ preemptive war against Iraq last year, while controversial, was not unprecedented. In 1981, Israel launched a preemptive military strike against Iraq’s unfinished nuclear reactor at Osirak. This attack by Israel indicated a willingness of its leaders to take matters into their own hands when diplomatic efforts were not trusted. In the next few months, Israel may again launch a first strike to prevent another country from going nuclear. This time, it’s Iran that may be the target, and this time, a unilateral move by Israel might spark a regional war.
This crisis has built up over the past two years. In 2002, Iran admitted that it had been bringing in nuclear materials and equipment for the previous 18 years, causing Western governments to fear that Tehran’s secret efforts might be disguised to produce a nuclear arsenal. Iran has denied this, but its reluctance to fully cooperate with outside inspections in the meantime has given more weight to that allegation.
Things came to a head this September, when the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) voted that Iran immediately halt its activities, and demanded that it demonstrate that its nuclear program is civilian or else risk having the situation turned over to the United Nations Security Council.
Iran immediately responded that it still planned to enrich over 37 tons of uranium, which would theoretically create enough for up to five nuclear weapons. But, giving it some diplomatic wiggle room, its foreign ministry has said that it has not done so yet, and outside examiners have not detected traces of enrichment.
The international inspection process may not be dead. Even while Iran continues to assert, “Nobody has the right to deny Iran its right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes,” he is also floating the idea of creating “any kind of verification mechanism” that could prove Iran’s nuclear program is civilian only.
Not good enough for Israel. While it is safe to say that all of Iran’s neighbors are disconcerted at the idea of it having a nuclear weapons program, Israel is probably the most alarmed. Spurring this on is Israel’s idea that Iran’s nuclear program will in November reach a “point of no return.”
Rumblings of a possible preemptive action have been echoing around Jerusalem. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, not known for his reluctance to engage in controversial military actions, asserted that Israel is “taking measures to defend itself.” His defense minister, Shaul Mofaz, has said, “All options have to be taken into account to prevent” Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapons program; furthermore, he has rather darkly commented, “The question is what comes first, nuclear ability or regime change.”
Adding credibility to these carefully vague warnings is the recent announcement that Israel would be buying $319 million worth of munitions from the United States, including 500 bunker-buster bombs. This purchase will update weapons already in Israel’s arsenal and has been in the works since June, but is still undoubtedly intended to send the message that Israel’s military is robust and well stocked with the latest armaments.
But as has been made painfully obvious by the war in Iraq, simply having the latest military hardware and the will to use them does not mean that your preemptive strike will have the desired effect. Iran’s nuclear facilities are strewn about a very large country and, if the intelligence is not solid, Israel may only land a glancing blow. In the process of doing so, Israel stands a very good chance of triggering a damaging military response from Iran. What’s more, other countries in the region may be convinced to join in the fray, either because they have long seethed that Israel alone in the Middle East is tacitly allowed to have a nuclear program, or because of resentment built up from the Israel-Palestine conflict.
A preemptive strike against a nebulous threat didn’t work for the United States; it would be foolish to think Israel would have better luck.
Distributed by www.minutemanmedia.org
Hermes