Operations in Iran Have Begun
Markkind has an excellent post regarding this, and I can't spend enough time on my work break to delve as deeply into this as I want to, but I thought everyone would be interested in reading about this...
This is not right, people. This is very very wrong. And if wingnuts could wrench their eyes away from the bright and shiny flashing lights of FOX News long enough to read about what's really going on, maybe... JUST MAYBE... some of them will realize that this is bad.
So the answer is just keep poking people with the short sticks we're left with? We should just waltz in and do whatever we want? Are we so drunk with arrogance that we no longer care about the moral or terroristic implications?
Fucking A. This really stinks to hell.
The US war with Iran has already begun
by Scott Ritter
As with Iraq, the president has paved the way for the conditioning of the American public and an all-too-compliant media to accept at face value the merits of a regime change policy regarding Iran, linking the regime of the Mullah's to an "axis of evil" (together with the newly "liberated" Iraq and North Korea), and speaking of the absolute requirement for the spread of "democracy" to the Iranian people...
The reality is that the US war with Iran has already begun. As we speak, American over flights of Iranian soil are taking place, using pilotless drones and other, more sophisticated, capabilities.
The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence-gathering phase.
President Bush has taken advantage of the sweeping powers granted to him in the aftermath of 11 September 2001, to wage a global war against terror and to initiate several covert offensive operations inside Iran...
Most Americans, together with the mainstream American media, are blind to the tell-tale signs of war, waiting, instead, for some formal declaration of hostility, a made-for-TV moment such as was witnessed on 19 March 2003.
This is not right, people. This is very very wrong. And if wingnuts could wrench their eyes away from the bright and shiny flashing lights of FOX News long enough to read about what's really going on, maybe... JUST MAYBE... some of them will realize that this is bad.
So the answer is just keep poking people with the short sticks we're left with? We should just waltz in and do whatever we want? Are we so drunk with arrogance that we no longer care about the moral or terroristic implications?
Fucking A. This really stinks to hell.
by MG at 8:52 AM
18 Comments:
Thanks for the plug.
All bloggers tuned into the news really should be concentrating on Iran right now. More than die-ins, more than street protests and more than "Rock Against Bush," the way to stop what's probably going to happen in Iran is to spread the word using pieces like the one from Ritter to tell the average person what's going on. Stay with the facts and God willing people will listen.
Those who think we should attack Iran however can't be reasoned with so I woudn't even try.
So Mark, just for the record. You are middle-of-the-road... not hardline right or left, correct? And you supported, and still do to some degree, the operations in Iraq? And you are not in support of operations in Iran?
Don't want to sound like I am grilling you, just want to clarify for those just joining this discussion already in progress :)
I'm a moderate conservative. I supported the Iraq war as a strategic maneuver and I still do because in the long run I think our prescence there will have a positive effect on the Middle East (I hope). However, I feel Rumsfeld failed to plan accordingly in Iraq (see Robert McNamara) thus the mess we are in now. We did not have enough troops to secure Iraq and did not plan for Iran funding terrorist attacks there (plus the whole Sader episode). Because of that and because I believe in the power of the Iranian people to overthrow the mullahs themselves, I don't support another adventure in the Middle East. There's no point in starting a war that won't be fought correctly. I believe that if we're not going to do this right (and by right I mean make Tehran look like Berlin circa end of WW II) then we should consider another plan. There's no point in getting American soldiers killed trying to make a war something it's not.
To sum up: I support internal regime change in Iran by the Iranians, not by force from the US.
Hope all this helps
Thanks Mark, I think that will give everyone a good idea of where you stand :)
I sure hope this helps him sell "Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of America's Intelligence Conspiracy". Some sources to back up his claims would help too.
Moxie and Mar, let me follow up with a couple of questions, again just to see where you stand, no trick here.
1.) Do you believe internal revolution is possible in Iran?
2.) Do you believe the election that took place last week was a good step or a sham?
3.)What would you have the US in order to further the democratic cause?
I mentioned Iran last night in a reply.
Scouts Honor, I don't work for the government or have Whitehouse.gov as my homepage.
I am 45 years old. I recall the Iran crisis in the 70's. It went unresolved.
It has been obvious that Iran would be "eyed" considering it is thus, another Nation that sponsers terrorism, public execution and repression amoung it's classes including Womans rights.
I read the post at aljazeera.net. This is #1 Propaganda for our enemies. This puplication DOES cause American Deaths. I have to admint, as an American I feel dirty just going to this site.
1.) Do you believe internal revolution is possible in Iran?
Yes, it may need a good kick in the pants by our CIA but it is absolutely possible. The Islamic Revolution was a revolt against the Shah and the tyranny he promoted. Those people have been betrayed by the mullahs and everything I've read seems to indicate that another revolution is brewing. It just needs something to stir it up and get it going (again, see CIA).
2.) Do you believe the election that took place last week was a good step or a sham?
A little from column A and a little from column B. Obviously it was somewhat of a sham as there appears to have been vote rigging. However, much like Ghandi in India, the way to succeed is not to blow yourself up but to shame your oppressors into submission. By participating in the election and then saying to the world, see it's a sham, they shame the mullahs as an illigitimate source of power and bring attention to their cause. However, if Rafsanjani actually ends up becoming president, then he may be the guy that stops an attack from the US. We can hardly bomb the country with an ally as the leadership.
3.)What would you have the US in order to further the democratic cause?
CIA operatives on the ground working with resistance causes. Give out handheld cameras to as many citizens as possible to show what life on the ground in Iran is like. Give money to opposition forces on the ground. Support Rafsanjani by calling him the only legitimate leader of Iran. Apologize for the Shah. Invite Rafsanjani (if he wins) to Washington. Re-open the Iranian embassy and drop trade sanctions against Iran.
Those last few are a risk as the mullahs are still trying make bombs but that's fine. Sometimes you gamble and it turns out working in your favor. Most experts say that Iran turned up the heat to make bombs strictly because of our intervention in Iraq. There's no way to prove it but it seems plausible. I contend that democracy follows money. Open up Iran to the world markets and democracy will follow, eventually.
Feel free to e-mail or comment on my blog if you want to continue the discussion, this being Moxie's blog and all ; )
Another important question is what countries are covert ops being executed at this point? The ones we actually learn about, no doubt, only scratch the surface.
Mark,
Took the conversation over to your blog.
Moxie,
We can continue to do business here if you're up to it
I will unlikely be able to answer your questions with well-researched info and opinions until much later tonight since I am at work now and have school afterward. Will pop over to Mark's place to keep up with the conversation tho.
Here is the Iran we should invade:
http://www.smithsonianmag.si.edu/smithsonian/issues05/mar05/iran.html
While it is true that Iran IS a terrorist nation with little doubt, the United States is in no way prepared to take on such a war effort. Iraq is consuming almost all of our resources. Even with a draft, we would be hard put to make success out of the mess. And what, then, if another crisis pops up somewhere else? We can't fight everywhere at once. This administration is not heeding this fact.
Under No circumstances should we ge tino Iran in the conventional sense, I support the Black Option but I am worried that recent overhauls in the past few years may actually make it a difficult task to achieve due to oversights. The bottom line is that if a Black option fails thousands of civilains and American service people have not lost their lives, but more importantantly if ithe option is exercsed honestly and in a way that is culturaly consistant with the demographics involved then the peoploe will actually come to it ontheir own I think Mrks ideas are exceptionally valid to the execution of such.
Excuse the whiskey fingers. (hicup!)
Don't forget...earlier Scott Ritter said, on a tip from someone who sounded a lot like Seymour Hersh, that June was when we'd start hitting Iran. Eight days left, kids!
just a though.. all this talk about war.. does anyone know when the last time that the US declared war on a country.. Im not sure myself.. i think that it was either the 2nd world war or vietnam.. you see, if was is not actually declared.. you do not have to obey the rules of the Geneva Convention. If anyone does know, post it up
Congress has not issued a formal declaration of war since December 8, 1941. Bush went ahead with war plans for Iraq, but never got congressional approval to declare war.
Here's the link
Post a Comment
<< Home